Court Opinion

ID: 9780559
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 02:11:28.303989+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:34:07.868806
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.'
We deny the Employer/Carrier’s motion for rehearing, but on our own motion, we withdraw our prior opinion and substitute the following in its place.
The Employer/Carrier (E/C) raises two issues in this workers’ compensation appeal, contending the Judge of Compensation Claims erred (1) in concluding that Claimant’s hypertension is compensable, and (2) in ordering the E/C to reimburse Claimant for out-of-pocket medical expenses. We affirm as to the first issue without further comment.
We reverse as to the second issue because Claimant did not file a petition for benefits seeking reimbursement for out-of-pocket medical expenses, and the Judge of Compensation Claims’ finding that the E/C stipulated to determination of the issue is not supported by competent substantial evidence. Due process bars a ruling on matters not at issue because the parties are entitled to notice in order to fairly present their case. See Specialty Risk Servs. v. Fleming, 875 So.2d 742 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Commercial Carrier Corp. v. LaPointe, 723 So.2d 912, 915 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Lakeside Baptist Church v. Jones, 714 So.2d 1188, 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.
BENTON, C.J., and PADOVANO, J., concur; WETHERELL, J., concurs specially with opinion.