Flareups of Same Disease Result in Multiple Accident Dates
Suppose an employee contracts an occupational disease which has naturally occurring periods of exacerbation and remission. In Orange County Fire Rescue v. Jones, the First DCA held 2-1 that each of those periods of exacerbation can constitute a new and separate "accident."
Why is this important? Well, for one reason, the parties' substantive rights in a workers' compensation case are governed by the law in effect on the date of the "accident." In this case Mr. Jones, a firefighter, had initially contracted Hepatits C in 1992 when the Florida Workers' Compensation Act provided for the payment of "wage loss" benefits upon attaining maximum medical improvement (MMI). But those benefits were only payable where the employee had some actual loss of earnings resulting from his accident or disease. In this case, Mr. Jones returned to work full time as a firefighter after attaining MMI so he didn't qualify for any wage loss benefits. His disease thereafter went into a period of remission.
By the time his disease flared up in 1997, the law had changed. In 1994, the legislature repealed the previous "wage loss" provisions and provided instead for the payment of "permanent impairment" (PI) benefits upon attaining MMI. Unlike wage loss benefits, PI benefits are payable without regard to economic loss. And following the 1997 flareup, Mr. Jones once again returned to work as a firefighter full time. Therefore, under the Court's ruling, Mr. Jones' 20% impairment rating following his 1997 flareup resulted in an extra 60 weeks' worth of PI benefits that he wouldn't have gotten had his rights been governed by the 1992 law.
