From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Florida Refrigerated Service v. Meeks

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jun 12, 1985
470 So. 2d 820 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Opinion

No. BA-263.

June 12, 1985.

Appeal from the Deputy Commissioner Louis F. Tidwell.

Susan W. Fox and Richard A. Valeri of Macfarlane, Ferguson, Allison Kelly, Tampa, for appellants.

Manuela A. Napier and David J. Williams of Lane, Trohn, Clarke, Bertrand Williams, Lakeland, for appellee.


We find no error in the compensation award appealed except for alleged ambiguity in the order that appellant shall:

Pay the medical bills incurred for treatment of the injury according to the medical fee schedule.

Appellee stipulates on appeal that all "medical bills have been paid by other sources and no claim is made for them" except for Lakeland General Hospital statements in evidence and Watson Clinic records previously provided to carrier. Our cases establish the carrier's right to have an award limited to medical bills in evidence, or otherwise identified with particularity, in the record, Decks, Inc. of Florida v. Wright, 389 So.2d 1074 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); and cf., Station Managers, Inc. v. Grover, 471 So.2d 118 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). We note, however, that the issues were clearly susceptible of clarification by specific objection before the deputy either at the hearing or after entry of the order. Failure to do so should foreclose appellate argument on the point.

Affirmed.

NIMMONS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Florida Refrigerated Service v. Meeks

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jun 12, 1985
470 So. 2d 820 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)
Case details for

Florida Refrigerated Service v. Meeks

Case Details

Full title:FLORIDA REFRIGERATED SERVICE AND RTC TRANSPORTATION, INC., APPELLANTS, v…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Jun 12, 1985

Citations

470 So. 2d 820 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

Citing Cases

Tasse v. Interamerican Transport Co.

We reject appellees' argument that claimant waived his right to raise the above issue because of his failure…

Jellison v. Dixie Southern Indus

We have specifically determined that any arguments concerning staleness of a final order must be preserved…