Purple Pride, Inc. / First Protective Ins. Co. v. Burgess, ___ So.3d ___ (Fla. 1st DCA 3/18/2026)
Medical Benefits / Medically Necessary Travel Bill Rogner
| The DCA set aside the JCC’s Order which required the E/C to pay for the costs of attendant care providers and DME for the quadriplegic claimant’s trip to visit family in New York. Although the JCC rejected the psychotherapist’s testimony that such a trip was “medically necessary” because it would improve claimant’s depression and anxiety symptoms, he still concluded the additional costs the claimant would incur while traveling should be paid by the E/C. The DCA noted that in analyzing what constitutes medically necessary travel expenses, prior cases rejected additional medical benefits for non-medically required travel to New York, and “quality of life” travel (to movies, grocery store, the mall, the park, mother’s home and even a father’s funeral). Such travel is “gratuitous and not compensable.” They found that the trip to New York was not medically necessary, and – at best – a quality-of-life excursion. As such travel is not included in the statute, it was error to order the E/C to pay for such. As the Order was set aside on these grounds, the opinion did not address the E/C’s first argument that the JCC could not order them to pay the claimant directly for the requested costs. They also noted the claimant’s cross-appeal on constitutional grounds was meritless, and a concurring opinion additionally noted that the claimant’s alleged constitutional challenge was invalid by virtue of failing to file and serve a notice of constitutional challenge as required by Fl.R. App. P. 9.425. Click here to view Opinion |