Butler v. Lanzo Construction Co.
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- City of Guntersville v. Bishop (Ala. Civ. App. 1997)
- R & T CONSTRUCTION CO. v. Judge (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1990)
- Aino's Custom Slip Covers v. DeLucia (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
As both the appellant and the ap-pellees concede, the deputy commissioner erred in the determination of the amount to be awarded for attendant care. The rate established by the deputy is purely arbitrary, without any foundation in the record. Thus, that finding is not supported by competent, substantial evidence. On remand, the deputy is to reconsider the proper amount, based upon the evidence before him. Further evidentiary proceedings may be conducted if necessary. The deputy is also directed to conduct further proceedings to determine the operability of the air conditioning system in the appellant’s home. The medical evidence established the appellant needs an air-conditioned living environment. Under these facts, it would be reasonable to require the employer/carrier to provide the injured employee with a working air conditioning system.
The other issues on appeal are found to be without merit. The deputy’s compensation order is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.