09-5678 LYKES PASCO PACKING COMPANY, erroneously designated as LYKES BROTHERS, INC., and CARRIER TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, erroneously designated as TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, v. JOSEPH L. CHESSH

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » Florida » Florida First District Court » 2010 » 09-5678 LYKES PASCO PACKING COMPANY, erroneously designated as LYKES BROTHERS, INC., and CARRIER TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, erroneously designated as TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, v. JOSEPH L. CHESSH

State: Florida

Court: Florida First District Court

Docket No: 09-5678

Case Date: 04/26/2010

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA LYKES PASCO PACKING COMPANY, erroneously designated as LYKES BROTHERS, INC., and CARRIER, TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY, erroneously designated as TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellants, v. JOSEPH L. CHESSHER, Appellee. _____________________________/ Opinion filed April 26, 2010. An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. Donna S. Remsnyder, Judge. Date of Accident: June 4, 1981. Dinah Stein, Steven H. Preston, and Michael S. Hirschkowitz of Hicks, Porter, Ebenfeld & Stein, P.A., Miami, for Appellants. Bradley Guy Smith of Smith, Feddeler, Smith & Miles, P.A., Lakeland, and Susan W. Fox of Fox & Loquasto, P.A., Tampa for Appellee. NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D09-5678

PER CURIAM. In this workers' compensation appeal, the Employer/Carrier (E/C) raises three points alleging error. We affirm the first two points without further

comment; however, we reverse the third point, concerning the JCC's failure to identify the specific type of attendant care services to be performed in the awarded eight hours of attendant care. Competent, substantial evidence supports the JCC's finding that Claimant is entitled to non-professional attendant care services. From the JCC's order,

however, it cannot be determined how many of the awarded hours of care are devoted to compensable tasks and how many, if any, are devoted to noncompensable household duties. Because much of the evidence received at the

final hearing related to Claimant's need for assistance with non-compensable household tasks, such as cleaning, laundry, and yard work, we reverse and remand the JCC's order for a determination of the types of compensable attendant care services awarded. See Southwood Timber Co. v. Hicks, 959 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (holding that the JCC erred by "failing to set forth the specific type and amount of attendant care services that should be performed in the future"); Rockette v. Space Gateway Support, 877 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (remanding for the JCC to make findings of fact as to number of hours reasonably expended by claimant's wife for care that went beyond ordinary household duties). 2

In particular, on remand, the JCC should identify the precise services awarded in accordance with the principles announced by this court in Montgomery Ward v. Lovell, 652 So. 2d 509 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). In all other respects, the JCC's order is affirmed. AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part and REMANDED. DAVIS, CLARK, and WETHERELL, JJ., CONCUR.

3

Download 09-5678 LYKES PASCO PACKING COMPANY, erroneously designated as LYKES BROTHERS, I