Skip to main content

Moya v Trucks and Parts

This December 20, 2012 1DCA decision affirmed Judge Jenkins JCC opinion. The issue being tried was authorization for an MRI of the right shoulder. 


In a final hearing in 2009, the JCC ruled that the claimant was at MMI for the right shoulder and that no further treatment to the right shoulder was needed.  



In 2012, the claimant was given a prescription for an MRI of the right shoulder and filed a PFB for same. The EC denied the MRI request and filed a motion for summary final order raising the defense of res judicata.  


The sole issue raised by the claimant was that the issue was not appropriate for a summary final order.  The Claimant submitted no affidavits, depositions, or other evidence to substantiate a material issue of fact that would preclude application of res judicata to his claim. Instead, he merely suggested the existence of such facts, providing no supporting evidence as required by rule 60Q-6.120(3), and represented that the treating doctor's deposition would be set, but gave no date or timeframe, and sought no extension of time. 


The JCC ruled the JCC appropriately entered a summary final order because Claimant failed to demonstrate a material factual issue precluding application of res judicata based on the January 2009 order.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

De la Cruz v Able Body Temporary Staffing

This March 6, 2012 1DCA opinion affirmed in part and reversed in part the JCC decision of Judge Sojourner. In this case, the claimant filed several petitions for benefits after injuring his right knee and left wrist in a workplace fall.  Among other things, Claimant sought authorization for a total knee replacement and TPD benefits related to the wrist injury that the Employer/Carrier had accepted as compensable.  The 1DCA held that the  JCC correctly held that the workplace accident was not the major contributing cause of Claimant’s need for knee surgery, and therefore, denied all related claims. The 1DCA affirmed that portion of the order. However, the 1DCA opined that the JCC did not rule on the TPD claim for the claimant's compensable wrist injury.  The 1DCA held that "Failure to rule on a fully tried issue is reversible error". To support their position, the 1 DCA cited the 1997 Betancourt v. Sears Roebuck & Co. Case.  The 1DCA...

Is coronavirus compensable under WC?

According to the NCCI, The answer to that question is maybe. While WC laws provide compensation for “occupational diseases” that arise out of and in the course of employment, many state statutes exclude “ordinary diseases of life” (e.g., the common cold or flu). There are occupational groups that arguably would have a higher probability for exposure such as healthcare workers. However, even in those cases, there may be uncertainty as to whether the disease is compensable. Would time away from work during recovery be considered “temporary disability” or is it just normal “sick time”?    https://www.ncci.com/Articles/Pages/Insights-COVID19-WorkersComp.aspx