Florida: Claimant Must Establish Medical Need for Ongoing Palliative Treatment

A Florida court has affirmed a JCC’s decision denying a follow-up appointment with a claimant’s authorized neurologist on the ground that the comp carrier met the burden of proving that the compensable injuries were not the major contributing cause (MCC) of the claimant’s need for the requested benefit. The claimant had argued that as a matter of law his permanent impairment rating assigned for his compensable injuries entitled him to ongoing palliative treatment, even in the absence of any medical testimony establishing a need for treatment. The appellate court acknowledged that some permanent injuries did not require ongoing active treatment but might require periodic doctor visits to ensure that the compensable injury was not worsening or in need of further evaluations or treatment. The court said that here, however, because the claimant did not establish that either periodic visits or further evaluations by his authorized doctor were appropriate for his compensable workplace injury, it would affirm the JCC's ruling.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is a leading commentator and expert on the law of workers’ compensation.

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance. Bracketed citations link to lexis.com.

See Echevarria v. Luxor Investments, LLC, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 3866 (1^st DCA, Mar. 18, 2015) [2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 3866 (1^st DCA, Mar. 18, 2015)]

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 94.04 [94.04]

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law.

For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site