Legal Opinion

Peo v. Maas Bros.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided April 12, 1994No. 92-3050Published

1Opinion of the Court

MICKLE, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the judge of compensation claims (JCC) denying the claim after finding that the treatment rendered to Claimant was time-barred by the statute of limitations. We reverse, finding as a matter of law that the care provided was “remedial attention relating to the insertion or attachment of a prosthetic device” as con- ■ templated in section 440.19(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1983).

The medical facts are not in dispute. Claimant, Winifred Peo, sustained a compen-sable accident on March 20, 1985, when she fractured her left hip after tripping and falling…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Daniel v. Holmes Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1986
  2. City of Orlando v. BlackburnDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
  3. Cash v. Universal Rivet, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1993
  4. Universal Rivet, Inc. v. CashDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API