Case Title: Southern Convalescent Home v. Wilson

Citation: 285 So. 2d 404

Docket Number: 43569

State: florida

Court: Florida Supreme Court

Date: 1973-11-07T00:00:00Z

Document:
285 So. 2d 404 (1973)
SOUTHERN CONVALESCENT HOME and R.P. Hewitt & Associates, Servicing Agent, Petitioners,
v.
John WILSON and Florida Department of Commerce, Industrial Relations Commission, Respondents.
No. 43569.

Supreme Court of Florida.
November 7, 1973.
*405 Robert H. Gregory, Coral Gables, for petitioners.
L. Barry Keyfetz, of Ser & Keyfetz, Miami, for respondents.
ROBERTS, Justice.
By petition for writ of certiorari, we have for review an order of the Industrial Relations Commission reversing and remanding this cause to the Judge of Industrial Claims.
While repsondent-claimant was preparing to aid in lifting trays of food from the floor to another person on the stairs who in turn would then hand the trays of food to a Rosa Jones on the second floor, he fell to a level synthetic tile floor in an epileptic type seizure which lasted at least five minutes. During this time, his feet were in a stairwell alcove and his body was in the hall; he was unconscious, clamping with his mouth closed, eyes rolling to the top of his head, and spasms of his upper and lower extremities. Petitioner denied that respondent had sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of his employment. An order was entered on August 17, 1970, by the Judge of Industrial Claims denying respondent's claim for temporary total disability benefits, medical expenses, permanent partial disability benefits, penalties, interest, and attorney's fees. Application for review was made and the Industrial Relations Commission by order dated April 26, 1971, reversed and remanded the cause to the trial judge with authority to hold further hearings, if deemed necessary, to make specific findings of fact as to the nature of the floor and as to whether the injuries complained of were the result of the condition of the floor upon which claimant fell, and to enter a new order. Petitioners petitioned this Court for writ of certiorari to review the Commission's order. This petition was denied by this Court by order dated September 1, 1971.
On remand, further hearing was held before the judge, at which hearing Dr. Elwin Neal, Mr. Sheldon Roe, an engineer, and Dr. Bernard Chariff testified. Based on the additional testimony and evidence produced at the previous hearing, the Judge of Industrial Claims entered a second order denying respondent's claim and therein, made a precise determination as to what constituted the efficient cause of claimant's injury. In this order the judge stated in pertinent part, as follows:
The Industrial Relations Commission in a two to one decision reversed this order and remanded to the judge for entry of a new order. In reversing, the Commission concluded that there was not competent substantial evidence to support the findings of the judge that the floor did not constitute a "hazard of employment" which contributed to the claimant's injury, and that respondent's injuries were solely due to the force of the epileptic seizure. This conclusion of the Commission is incorrect.
We agree with Commissioner Coleman who dissented from the Commission's order and properly concluded that this case presents an ordinary case of competent substantial evidence and that the questioned order of the Judge of Industrial Claims did contain findings which were fully supported by competent substantial evidence. Clearly supported by the record of evidence before this Court, Commissioner Coleman evaluating each finding and finding supportive evidence therefor, stated, inter alia, as follows:
In reversing the judge, the Commission relied upon this Court's decision in Protectu Awning Shutter Co. v. Cline, 154 Fla. 30, 16 So. 2d 342 (1942). Cline is distinguishable, however, from the instant cause. Therein, claimant, an elderly cabinet maker, suffered from a heart ailment which caused fainting spells. While experiencing a fainting spell at work, he fell striking his head against the concrete floor causing a skull fracture. He died as a result of the skull fracture not from the heart attack. Allowing benefits under the peculiar facts, this Court indicated in Cline that it was a borderline case. Death resulted from a skull fracture resultant from a fall on concrete which was completely unrelated to the cause of his fall  a heart attack. Subsequently, this Court in Foxworth v. Florida Industrial Commission, 86 So. 2d 147, 151 (Fla. 1956), explained the Cline case, as follows:
In Foxworth, supra at 151, citing a great deal of authority, this Court declared that it is well settled that injuries arising out of risks or conditions personal to the claimant do not arise out of the employment unless the employment contributes to the risk or aggravates the injury. There is a basis for recovery for injuries resulting from a fall caused by personal physical conditions where the injuries from the fall can be attributed to some increased hazard attendant to the job, such as where the fall is onto dangerous objects. Several examples of what would constitute such a dangerous item were set out in Foxworth, to-wit: sawhorse, iron motor box, hot stove, spot welding machine, sharp corner of a wooden table, and a fire built by a night watchman. Therein, this Court further opined,
Our latest pronouncement in this area of workmen's compensation law is contained in our recent decision of Federal Electric Corp. v. Best, 274 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 1973), wherein we quashed the order of the Commission reversing the Judge of Industrial Claims and ordered reinstatement of the judge's order. In Best, supra, the judge entered an order finding,
As a result of the fall, Best fractured his skull. Finding the order of the judge was supported by the evidence and in accordance with the essential requirements of the law, we held,
Sub judice the judge rightly found that there was not any hazard of employment that contributed in any degree to the claimant's injuries and it was solely the force of the non-occupational seizure that caused the injury of which the complainant complained. The cause of harm to the claimant was personal and due to the epileptic seizure. This Court has opined that the trial judge is the fact finder and if his findings are supported by competent substantial evidence, the appellate tribunal will not weigh the evidence and substitute its findings for those of the trial judge. United States Casualty Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 55 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 1951), Meadows v. Curly's Trash Service, Inc., 244 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1971). Review of the evidence adduced before the Judge of Industrial Claims convinces us that his findings and order are supported by competent substantial evidence.
Accordingly, certiorari is granted and the order of the Commission is quashed with instructions to reinstate the order of the Judge of Industrial Claims.
It is so ordered.
CARLTON, C.J., McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
ADKINS, J., dissents.