Hamilton v. Stamas Yachts
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
MILLS, Judge.
Hamilton appeals from a workers’ compensation order which denied the compens-ability of her claim. She asserts, among other things, error in the deputy commissioner’s finding that her duties did not change significantly prior to the onslaught of her pain and the deputy commissioner’s acceptance of Dr. Harrison’s opinion regarding causation over that of Dr. Pell. We affirm the order.
Hamilton began work with Stamas Yachts, the E/C herein, as a finisher of commercial yachts in 1981. Her duties as a *231finisher included sanding and buffing the exterior of boats to improve their cosmetic…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Festa v. Teleflex, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- Harris v. Josephs of Greater Miami, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1960
- Broward Indus. Plating, Inc. v. WeibyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
- Lake v. Irwin Yacht & Marine Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
- Food MacHinery Corp. v. ShookDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Wood v. Harry Harmon InsulationDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
- Cargill, Inc. v. JeffersDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996