Johns Eastern Co. v. Bellamy

Topics

Practice areas

Questions Presented

1. Whether the claimant satisfied the prerequisites for the occupational causation presumption under section 112.18(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2011).
2. What burden of proof an employer or carrier must meet to rebut the section 112.18 occupational causation presumption when the claimant relies solely on the presumption and no independent medical evidence supporting occupational causation has been accepted as credible.
3. Whether the JCC's order had to be reversed and remanded because it referenced both competent evidence and clear and convincing evidence without identifying which burden the Employer/Carrier was required to meet.

Holdings

1. The court affirmed, without further comment, the JCC's finding that the claimant satisfied the prerequisites for the occupational causation presumption afforded by section 112.18(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2011).
2. When a claimant relies solely on the statutory presumption and there is no independent medical evidence supporting occupational causation that has been accepted as credible by the JCC, the Employer/Carrier may rebut the presumption with competent evidence. Clear and convincing evidence is required only when evidence supporting the presumption has been accepted as credible by the JCC.
3. The JCC's order had to be reversed and remanded because it referenced both competent evidence and clear and convincing evidence without specifying which burden the Employer/Carrier had to meet, leaving it unclear whether the JCC improperly imposed the higher burden.

Factual background

The claimant was a firefighter/paramedic diagnosed with hypertension and premature ventricular contractions. He sought workers' compensation benefits under the occupational causation presumption in section 112.18(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2011). The JCC found that he satisfied the prerequisites for the presumption but referenced both competent-evidence and clear-and-convincing-evidence burdens when deciding whether the Employer/Carrier rebutted it.

Procedural history

The Judge of Compensation Claims found that the claimant satisfied the prerequisites for the occupational causation presumption applicable to firefighters and awarded benefits. The Employer/Carrier appealed, arguing that the JCC applied an incorrect burden of proof when determining whether the statutory presumption had been rebutted. The appellate court affirmed the finding that the claimant qualified for the presumption but reversed and remanded for application of the appropriate rebuttal burden.

Remand instructions

The JCC must determine whether the Employer/Carrier rebutted the section 112.18 presumption by applying the competent-evidence burden, because no independent medical evidence supporting occupational causation was cited as having been accepted as credible.