A Florida court recently ruled on a workers' compensation case involving Marek Krysiak and the City of Kissimmee, along with Toho Water Authority and Preferred Government Claims Solutions. The court's decision impacts Krysiak's ability to change his physician and his eligibility for temporary partial disability benefits after being terminated from his job.
The case, Marek Krysiak v. City of Kissimmee, Toho Water Authority/Preferred Government Claims Solutions, was filed on February 13, 2020, under docket number 1D18-5241. The court's ruling addressed two main issues: Krysiak's request for a one-time change of physician and the denial of temporary partial disability benefits due to alleged misconduct.
Background
Marek Krysiak suffered a workplace injury to his left shoulder on October 12, 2016. Following the injury, he was placed under work restrictions but was later deemed to have reached maximum medical improvement by February 2017. Although he returned to work, he was terminated on October 31, 2017, for violating the employer's substance abuse policy.
After his termination, Krysiak filed petitions for benefits seeking to authorize Dr. Winters as his one-time change of physician and to receive temporary partial disability benefits. The employer and servicing agent (E/SA) denied his request for Dr. Winters, arguing that Krysiak had already accepted their choice of physician, Dr. Reuss. They also claimed that Krysiak's termination was due to misconduct, which would disqualify him from receiving temporary partial disability benefits.
The Ruling
The court ruled on both issues in its decision. First, it affirmed the Judge of Compensation Claims' (JCC) ruling that Krysiak was not entitled to select his own physician. The court stated, "Claimant acquiesced to the Employer/Servicing Agent’s choice of physician and thus waived the option of making his own selection." This ruling was based on the finding that Krysiak had attended appointments with Dr. Reuss, despite his initial objections to the selection.
On the second issue regarding temporary partial disability benefits, the court reversed the JCC's decision. The court found that there was no competent, substantial evidence to support the claim that Krysiak committed misconduct that resulted in his termination. The ruling emphasized that the employer had the burden to prove misconduct, and the evidence presented did not meet that standard.
Impact
This ruling has significant implications for Krysiak and similar workers' compensation cases in Florida. By affirming the denial of Krysiak's request for a one-time change of physician, the court reinforced the idea that workers must be diligent in asserting their rights to select their medical providers. However, by reversing the ruling on temporary partial disability benefits, the court highlighted the importance of having clear and substantial evidence when claiming employee misconduct.
The decision also sets a precedent for how courts may interpret the evidence required to prove misconduct in workers' compensation cases. It emphasizes that vague or insufficient evidence cannot be used to deny benefits, which could lead to more favorable outcomes for employees in similar circumstances.
What's Next
The case may be subject to further appeal, as the court's decision is not final until any timely motions are resolved. There may also be related cases pending that could further clarify the standards for workers' compensation claims in Florida.