William Love v. Orgill (Sentry Claims Services) | St Pete Workers Comp
In William Love v. Orgill, the employer asserted multiple defenses against the claimant’s claim for compensation. The employer stated a fraud defense, saying that the claimant did not report their sibling’s income on the DWC-19. The fraud defense was rejected due to a lack of evidence. An expert medical advisor (EMA) was appointed, and they stated that the claimant’s surgery was not necessary. Conflicting medical professionals’ opinions were provided, and the JCC determined that shoulder surgery was denied but shoulder care would be continued.
Fraud defense DENIED
Shoulder surgery DENIED
Shoulder care GRANTED
Temporary partial disability GRANTED
Penalties and interest GRANTED
Attorney fees RESERVED