Florida: Court Says Evidence Was Insufficient to Show Home Renovations Were Medically Necessary

An award of claims by a JCC for authorization of lawn care, attendant care, a podiatrist, an AFO brace, and evaluation of the need for specialized shoes was affirmed, but the award for home renovations was reversed because the evidence identified by the JCC did not constitute competent, substantial evidence of the medical necessity for the numerous home renovations awarded. The court reasoned that while the orthopedic surgeon indicated that he agreed with some of the suggestions in a home assessment report completed by a registered nurse, the physician never identified which ones should be provided. The nurse’s opinion testimony, while arguably sufficient to show how a properly accessible environment could be provided, was insufficient to establish the medical necessity for the specific accommodation or assistance because she was not a physician.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is the co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.

See AT&T Communications v. Rosso, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 6125 (May 2, 2017)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 94.03.

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