Ft. Walton Beach Medical Center/Broadspire v. Tara Young
223 So. 3d 445
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Claimant Tara Young sought permanent total disability (PTD) and related benefits after a January 4, 2013 workplace injury.
- The Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) awarded PTD, permanent impairment, penalties, interest, costs, and attorney fees, relying on this Court's Westphal I decision.
- The JCC found Claimant not at maximum medical improvement (MMI) psychologically, but treated statutory exhaustion of 104 weeks of temporary benefits as achieving "statutory MMI."
- Employer/Carrier (E/C) appealed the PTD award and related relief; no cross-appeal was filed.
- While the appeal was pending, the Florida Supreme Court decided Westphal II, quashing Westphal I and holding the 104-week TTD limitation unconstitutional.
- The district court reviewed the legal standard de novo and concluded the JCC's PTD award was erroneous under Westphal II, reversing and remanding.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether exhaustion of 104 weeks of TTD creates "statutory MMI" that permits PTD award | Young relied on Westphal I to treat 104-week exhaustion as statutory MMI supporting PTD | E/C argued Westphal I was overruled and 104-week rule cannot create MMI under Westphal II | Court held Westphal II controls; treating 104-week exhaustion as MMI was error and reversed PTD award |
| Whether JCC applied correct legal standard after Westphal II | Young implicitly contended JCC correctly applied Westphal I precedent | E/C argued JCC used an incorrect standard now overruled by the supreme court | Court reviewed de novo and applied Westphal II to reverse |
| Retroactivity of Westphal II to this case | Young effectively relied on prior intermediate appellate precedent | E/C argued Westphal II applies because no prior supreme-court construction had vested rights | Court held Westphal II applies here because Westphal I was intermediate-court precedent and the supreme court had accepted review before benefits claims were filed |
| Need to address other asserted errors by E/C | Young contested other denials and awards in merits order | E/C raised multiple additional errors on appeal | Court found reversal on Westphal II ground dispositive and did not reach remaining issues |
Key Cases Cited
- Westphal v. City of St. Petersburg, 194 So. 3d 311 (Fla. 2016) (supreme court quashes Westphal I and holds 104-week TTD limitation unconstitutional)
- Westphal v. City of St. Petersburg, 122 So. 3d 440 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (intermediate appellate decision previously relied on by JCC)
- Florida Forest and Park Service v. Strickland, 18 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1944) (discusses prospective/retroactive effect of overruling decisions)
- Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Von Stetina, 474 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 1985) (appellate courts generally apply law in effect at time of decision)
- Banks v. Allegiant Sec., 122 So. 3d 983 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (review of erroneous application of law is de novo)