Search      Advanced Search | Browse By Topic
Magazine Content
Home
Features
Columnists
Industry Risk Reports
In-Depth Series
Special Reports
Point/Counterpoint
R&I One® Content
News & Analysis
Editor's Choice Stories
Resources and Tools
Power Broker® Directory
Risk InnovatorTM
Emerging Risks
Top Employee Benefits Consultant
Executives To Watch
Insights
Industry Events
WorkersComp Forum
Award Nominations
Webinars
RSS
R&I Information
Subscription Center
Advertiser Information
About Us
Contact Us
 

Newsletter Sign-up

Click on the name of the free newsletter below to preview:

R&I One®
WORKERSCOMP Forum TM Update
HTML Text
E-Mail Address:


Click here to unsubscribe
Privacy Policy
Preferences

 

Worker's knee brace, insertion of screw fail to toll statute of limitations

In Florida, an employer's actual knowledge that a worker used a doctor-prescribed brace can toll the statute of limitations for a petition for benefits.

Print Email Add to Facebook Add to Twitter Add to LinkedIn Write to the Editor Reprints

Case name: Johnson v. Publix Supermarkets, 19 FLWCLB 64 (Fla. JCC, Lakeland 2012).

Ruling: A Florida judge of compensation claims denied a worker's petition for benefits because it was barred by the statute of limitations.

What it means: In Florida, an employer's actual knowledge that a worker used a doctor-prescribed brace can toll the statute of limitations for a petition for benefits.

Summary: A worker injured his knee at work. He underwent surgery and had a screw inserted into his knee. His physical therapy referral included an instruction that he be weaned off a brace. He requested authorization for a return appointment with his doctor. The employer argued that the statute of limitations barred the worker's petition. The worker contended that his continued use of the knee brace and the insertion of the screw tolled the running of the statute. Upon review, the JCC agreed with the employer and denied the petition.

The worker did not establish that the employer had knowledge of his use of the brace. He often did not see a supervisor while working, and he wore the brace only to load and unload his truck four or five times per month. The fact that he occasionally wore the brace to work did not establish implied knowledge.

The JCC also rejected the worker's argument that the screw inserted into his knee was a medical device which tolled the statute. He failed to establish the purpose for inserting the screw.

Read more at the WorkersComp Forum homepage.

June 28, 2012

Copyright 2012© LRP Publications

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RISK logo
 

Back to top

Entire contents copyright © 2013 Risk and Insurance® All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without written permission.