Jung v. City of Sarasota
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Claimant appeals an order denying payment of his medical bills. We affirm.
No medical bills or medical reports were introduced into evidence. There was some testimony as to the amount of the bills but it was vague, indefinite and inconclusive. The deputy commissioner’s (deputy) determination that this testimony should be rejected was correct. All doubt and uncertainty as to the amount of the bills could have and should have been removed by introducing the written bills into evidence or at least by clear and unequivocal testimony. American Grinding and Equipment v. Rodman, 411 So.2d 917 (Fla.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Decks, Inc. of Florida v. WrightDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- AMERICAN GRINDING & EQUIP. v. RodmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
3Cited by3 opinions
- Martin Marietta Corp. v. GlumbDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
- Chase v. Henkel & McCoyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
- Burroughs Corp. v. GloverDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986