Wiszniav.Leon Co. Animal Control

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First DistrictMay 19, 2005
902 So. 2d 271 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Cases citing this document

How cited

  • Manuel v. Amstaff

    We have reviewed the record and find that it does not contain competent and substantial evidence to support a…

1 Citing case

No. 1D04-664.

May 19, 2005.

An appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims. John J. Lazzara, Judge.

Terry P. Roberts and Paul M. Anderson of Anderson Sullivan, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Mary E. Cruickshank of DuBois Cruickshank, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellees.


ON MOTION FOR REHEARING AND/OR CLARIFICATION


We grant appellees' Motion for Rehearing and/or Clarification to the extent that we withdraw our previous opinion and substitute the following:

In this workers' compensation case, as in Cromartie v. City of St. Petersburg, 882 So.2d 439 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), our review of the record satisfies us that the record does not contain competent and substantial evidence to support the determination of the judge of compensation claims that clear and convincing evidence existed sufficient to reject the appointed expert medical advisor's opinion that the claimant had sustained a psychiatric injury as a result of the compensable workplace accident. Accordingly, as in Cromartie, we reverse the order denying the petition to the extent that petition requested psychiatric care, and remand with directions that the judge of compensation claims enter an order granting the request for such care.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

WEBSTER, BENTON and POLSTON, JJ., concur.