Colonial Oaks Apartment v. Hood
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
SHIVERS, Senior Judge.
Colonial Oaks Apartments, the employer, and Continental Loss Adjusting Services, the servicing agent (together, the E/SA) appeal a workers’ compensation order wherein the Judge of Compensation Claims (JCC) found that a penetrating keratoplasty or corneal graft constituted a “prosthetic device” for the purposes of section 440.19(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1990). Upon our determination that a corneal graft, as living tissue, does not meet the definition of prosthetic device established by this court1 and adopted by the supreme court,2 we reverse.
*447On July 20,1990 George Hood…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Roe v. CITY INVESTING/GENERAL DEV. CORP.Supreme Court of Florida · 1991
- Cash v. Universal Rivet, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1993
- Universal Rivet, Inc. v. CashDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
3Cited by1 opinion
- Vitti v. MilfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2020