Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2004

Montgomery Insurance v. Deyo

Montgomery Insurance v. Deyo
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided June 29, 2004 · Nortwick, Polston, Webster
876 So. 2d 697; 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 9011; 2004 WL 1439693 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Montgomery Insurance v. Deyo

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

In this workers’ compensation case, the employer and carrier seek review of a final order directing them to reimburse the claimant for the cost of a new “handicap-accommodated” van. Based upon Caron v. Systematic Air Services, 576 So.2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), we reject the employer’s and carrier’s argument that the issue of entitlement to such an award is barred by res judicata. However, because the claimant failed clearly to establish her entitlement to reimbursement for a new “handicap-accommodated” van as opposed to the 24-hour-a-day convenient alternative transportation for the claimant and her caregiver offered by the employer and carrier, we are constrained to reverse the award of reimbursement for the van based upon our decision in Kraft Dairy Group v. Cohen, 645 So.2d 1072 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). The pertinent facts are indistinguishable from those in Kraft. Accordingly, as in Kraft, we must reverse.

REVERSED.

WEBSTER, VAN NORTWICK and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.