IN THE
JANUARY 2022
NOW
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION EDITION
IN THIS ISSUE: • • • • •
Medical Necessity One-Time Change Alternate Physician Compensability EMA
EDITOR’S LETTER
WELCOME Joshua T. Higgins, Esq. Editor, and Business Unit Leader/Partner
of claims filed was pretty close to the previous
What the new year brings to you will depend a great deal on what you bring to the
related claims had decreased significantly. With the latest variant out there, I would expect there to still be a tremendous number of COVID claims filed in 2022.
new year.
few years, but the number of non-COVID
As always,
having a consistent approach to handling of
–Vern McLellan
these claims will be important. Fortunately, at this point, it seems as though there has been
Going into a new year is always a bit strange, and after the past two years, it is entirely unclear what 2022 will bring. However, like always, a positive mentality and willingness to try to improve upon the previous year are of paramount importance in terms of trying to have a good, productive year. As it relates to claims, it will be interesting to see whether there is an increase or decrease in claims in 2022. In 2020 and 2021, the number
less willingness for attorneys to litigate COVID claims, but it is possible that this will change, despite the tremendous legal hurdle that most COVID claims have in terms of meeting the compensability standard.
Hopefully by this
time next year “regular” claims will be more prevalent than COVID claims!
TABLE OF
CONTENTS MEDICAL NECESSITY Vann v. J & M Ranch, Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6 OJCC Case No. 16-030531NPP (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 22, 2021)
ONE-TIME CHANGE Carlton v. L & M Endeavors, LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-8 OJCC Case No. 19-025081RLD (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 16, 2021)
ALTERNATE PHYSICIAN Smith v. Palm Beach County Board . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-10 OJCC Case No. 88-000326TAH (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 10, 2021)
COMPENSABILITY Haselden v. Waffle House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9-11 OJCC Case No. 19-023454WRH (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. October 28, 2021)
EMA Williams v. Healthcare Cosmetology Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12-13 OJCC Case No. 20-013230RLD (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 17, 2021)
CONTRIBUTORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14-15 HELPING YOU STAY AHEAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-17 AWARDS AND ACCOLADES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18-19 FIRM OVERVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-21
4 | IN THE
NOW
Vann v. J & M Ranch, Inc. OJCC Case No. 16-030531NPP (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 22, 2021)
KK TAKEAWAY: The use of an in-home spa is not medically necessary
from
a
pain
management
perspective when aquatic therapy in a public setting would provide the same medical benefit(s).
KK TAKEAWAY: The use of an in-home spa is not medically necessary from a psychiatric perspective in the absence of competent substantial evidence indicating that the use of a spa in a public setting causes a claimant anxiety.
BACKGROUND: On November 22, 2021, JCC Pitts issued a Final Compensation Order on the Claimant’s request for authorization of an in-home swim spa per authorized treating pain management physician, Dr. Miranda. By way of background, the Claimant was involved in a compensable work accident on May 10, 2013 when he was run down by a cow. He sustained significant injuries in the accident and underwent lower back surgery, a total knee replacement, and has been accepted a permanently and totally disabled. On April 15, 2021, the Claimant followed up with Dr. Miranda’s office, but did not see Dr. Miranda.
Rather, he saw the physician
assistant (PA), who wrote the Claimant a prescription for a swim spa. The Claimant again followed up with Dr. Miranda on June 10, 2021 and they discussed the in-home swim IN THE
NOW | 5
spa. Dr. Miranda agreed to the request, as the
In his decision, JCC Pitts reasoned that the
Claimant had tried a number of other treatment
Claimant did not testify regarding his anxiety
modalities and the Claimant thought a swim
related to going to public facilities to use a
spa would benefit his for overall health and/or
spa, nor did the Claimant testify that he used a
conditioning.
public facility, found it helpful, but did not wish
At his deposition, Dr. Miranda testified that a person with chronic pain, inflammation, and musculoligamentous symptoms would benefit from having a jetting massage or
to continue in a public setting due to anxiety. He rather testified that he is in constant pain and wants an in-home spa to see if it would help his condition.
warmth for improvement of those symptoms.
JCC Pitts found that the Claimant did not meet
However, Dr. Miranda related the benefits to
his burden of proof to establish that an in-home
aquatic therapy in general and not specifically
spa, as opposed to aquatic therapy in general
an in-home spa. He further testified that the
at a public place, is reasonable and medically
aquatic therapy could be done at a YMCA or at a public facility, and that it was not medically necessary that the recommended aquatic therapy be provided in the form of an in-home spa. The
parties
each
obtained
psychiatric
Independent Medical Examinations (IME). While the Claimant IME did testify that the Claimant would benefit from an in-home spa, he deferred the decision of whether aquatic therapy would be provided at home or at a public facility to the pain management physician. Additionally, he testified that an inhome spa is not something he would consider in his specialty. As for the Employer/Carrier IME, he testified that the Claimant had generalized anxiety disorder and improved depression. However, in his 30-year career, he has never prescribed or reviewed any literature which supports using an in-home spa to treat anxiety disorders. He further testified that the Claimant does not have a psychiatric disorder which warrants the use of an in-home spa versus aquatic therapy at a public facility. 6 | IN THE
NOW
necessary. This finding related to both a pain management and a psychiatric perspective. From a pain management perspective, JCC Pitts accepted Dr. Miranda’s opinion that while aquatic therapy in general was reasonable and medically necessary, he did not testify that the use of an in-home spa was medically necessary. From a psychiatric perspective, JCC Pitts pointed to a lack of competent substantial evidence that an in-home spa would have been reasonable and medically necessary from a psychiatric treatment consideration, and how the psychiatric IME deferred to the pain management physician as far as the issue of whether the recommended aquatic therapy would be provided at home or at a public facility. Based upon the foregoing, the Claimant’s request for an in-home spa was denied.
Carlton v. L & M Endeavors, LLC OJCC Case No. 19-025081RLD (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 16, 2021)
KK TAKEAWAY: KK Takeaway: A request for a one-time change in physician is not made during the course of treatment and thus, not permitted, where a
of the employee, the carrier shall give the employee the opportunity for one change of physician during the course of treatment for any one accident. Upon the granting of a change of physician, the originally authorized physician in the same specialty as the changed physician shall become deauthorized upon written notification by the employer or carrier.”
prior Order is issued indicating that the there
On June 29, 2021, JCC Dietz entered a prior
is no additional treatment medical necessary
Final Order denying continued medical care
for a claimant.
for the Claimant due to a lack of evidence of
BACKGROUND:
medical necessity. As a result, he reasoned that the Claimant’s request a one-time
On November 16, 2021, JCC Dietz issued a
change in physician was not made during the
Final Compensation Order on the sole issue of
course of treatment as required by §440.13(2)
Claimant’s request for a one-time change in
(f), as the only medical evidence the Claimant
treating physician via a July 13, 2021 Petition
presented at the hearing were medical
for Benefits.
records from CareSpot Urgent Care from the
According to Florida Statute
§440.13(2)(f), “[u]pon the written request
date of accident. IN THE
NOW | 7
The Claimant argued that a right to a one-time change vests indefinitely when a Claimant
would be added to the commute.
first visits an authorized physician. However,
BACKGROUND:
the Claimant’s argument did not take into
On November 10, 2021, JCC Hedler issued a
account the statutory language of during
Final Compensation Order on the Claimant’s
the course of treatment, and that this vested
request for “an orthopedic surgeon in the
right had been revoked by the June 29, 2021
Ocala, FL area as the claimant [] moved to said
Order denying additional medical care. The
area and his current authorized doctor is too
Claimant had an opportunity to appeal the
far to travel.”
June 29, 2021 decision, but chose not to, and
By
in the absence of a reversal of an appeal of the prior order, judicial determination precludes a finding that the one-time change had been requested during the course of treatment.
way
of
background,
the
Claimant
sustained a compensable work injury to his right knee on February 5, 1988 while working for Palm Beach County. The Claimant moved to Inverness, Florida in 1996, then to Plant
Based upon the foregoing, JCC Dietz denied
City in 1998 and back to Inverness in 2000.
the Claimant’s request for a one-time change
In January 2021, the claimant moved to
in treating physician.
Ocala, Florida. For over ten (10) years, the Claimant treated with Dr. Jeremiah Hubbard, whose office was in Inverness where the Claimant lived at the time. In June 2020, Dr.
Smith v. Palm Beach County Board OJCC Case No. 88-000326TAH (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 10, 2021)
KK TAKEAWAY: In order to obtain an alternate treating physician under Florida Statute §440.13(3), a Claimant must object to the medical attendance furnished by the employer, but a Claimant need not provide grounds for the
Hubbard retired, and the Claimant’s care was transferred to orthopedic surgeon Dr. Walter Choung, whose office was located in Beverly Hills, Florida. The Claimant treated with Dr. Choung from June 2020 to December 2020 and in January 2021, the Claimant moved to Ocala. He had not returned to see Dr. Choung since, instead requesting an orthopedic surgeon in Ocala, Florida.
The Employer/
Carrier defended the claim by asserting it was
objection.
reasonable for the Claimant to continue care
KK TAKEAWAY:
provide transportation.
with Dr. Choung and that it would be willing to
It is unreasonable to require a Claimant,
Analysis of the issue required a look at Florida
who regularly receives treatment and who
Statutes §440.13(2) and §440.13(3) as they
has moved to different locality, to continue
were both in effect at the time of the accident.
treating with the authorized doctor in the
Florida Statute §440.13(2) provides that the
previous locality, where an additional 30 miles
“the employer shall furnish to the employee
8 | IN THE
NOW
such medically necessary remedial treatment,
the Claimant must merely object to secure
care, and attendance for such period as the
an alternate provider, and that the grounds
nature of the injury or the process of recovery
for objection are not relevant. JCC Hedler
may
§440.13(3),
found that the Claimant properly objected to
states “[i]f an injured employee objects to
the medical care provided by the Employer/
the medical attendance furnished by the
Carrier and although the grounds for the
employer pursuant to subsection (2), it shall
objection was due to a travel requirement, JCC
be the duty of the employer to select another
Hedler found this to be irrelevant. As such,
physician to treat the injured employee unless
the Employer/Carrier must either provide
a deputy commissioner determines that a
alternate treatment or seek a JCC ruling that a
change in medical attendance is not for the
change in medical attendance would not be in
best interest of the injured employee.”
the best interests of the Claimant. The burden
The Employer/Carrier argued that §440.13(3)
is on the Employer/Carrier and in this instance,
require.”
Furthermore,
was not applicable because the Claimant did not express “dissatisfaction” with Dr. Choung.
the Employer/Carrier did not meet such a burden, as it failed to present any evidence of
Dr. Hedler found that the term “dissatisfaction”
an adverse impact on the Claimant.
was not found in the applicable statute and
JCC Hedler then turned his focus to the
that there was no similar term or phrase that
Employer/Carrier’s
would invoke the requirement of such a finding.
medical treatment that falls under the
Rather, the statute and case law provide that
standard of reasonable care under §440.13(2).
obligation
to
IN THE
furnish
NOW | 9
The Claimant argued that it would be unreasonable for him to be required to treat with a provider in another county from his
Haselden v. Waffle House OJCC Case No. 19-023454WRH
residence, while the Employer/Carrier argued
(FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. October 28, 2021)
that Dr. Choung was within a reasonable
KK TAKEAWAY:
distance and continued authorization would be reasonable as transportation was offered to the Claimant. Testimony revealed that the Claimant’s commute to Dr. Choung’s office from his Inverness home was about 20 miles, one-way, while the distance from the Ocala residence was 35 miles, one-way. However, the determination of reasonableness is within the discretion of the JCC and is to be assessed under the purview of the totality of circumstances for final determination. JCC
Hedler
ultimately
found
that
the
continued authorization of Dr. Choung was not reasonable. He found that the Claimant was active in treating with Dr. Choung and that it would not make sense to require the claimant to drive 70 miles, round trip, to treat regularly or obtain an injection to the knee. Furthermore, the fact that the Claimant had continued to treat for more than 30 years post-accident reflects the need for active treatment. Based upon the foregoing, JCC Hedler found that (1) the Claimant was entitled to an alternate provider in Ocala, Florida, (2), that the Employer/Carrier did not establish that alternate care would not be in the claimant’s best interests, and (3) that the Employer/ Carrier’s provision of medical care with Dr. Choung (or an alternate in the same area) was unreasonable upon consideration of the totality of the circumstances.
A worker injured in an attempt to obtain pain relief from a co-worker while “on the clock” is not a substantial deviation from employment or
horseplay
which
would
constitute
actions outside of the course and scope of employment.
BACKGROUND: On October 28, 2021, JCC Holley issued a Final Compensation Order with regard to compensability of a workplace accident, among other benefits requested. By way of background, the Claimant worked as a grill operator for the Insured at a Jacksonville, Florida location. On June 15, 2019, the date of accident, the Claimant was working a seventeen (17) hour double shift without a break and began to feel pain in his lumbar spine. At around 7:00a.m, the store manager “Malick” came into work and the Claimant, while still on the clock, reported the lower back pain to Malick and that it had been caused by standing over the grill for 17 hours without a break. At that time, the supervisor offered to “pop” the Claimant’s back for him to relieve the pain. The Claimant lifted his hands up and put them together behind his head before the supervisor pushed or yanked down on the claimant’s elbows. Although the Claimant testified, he did not feel an actual “pop” due to the supervisor’s actions, he did gradually notice some increasing pain until later than afternoon. When he got up later
10 | IN THE
NOW
that afternoon to get ready for work, he felt significant pain, and indicated that he was unable to stand up straight, walk, or lay down. JCC Holley cited Florida Statute §440.09(1), which states that an employer is required to pay compensation or furnish benefits as set forth in Chapter 440 “if the employee suffers an accidental compensable injury or death arising out of work performed in the course and scope of employment.” As a general rule, an injury is considered to be in the course and scope of employment when it occurs within a period of employment, at a place where the employee may reasonably be and while the employee is reasonably fulfilling the duties of employment or engaging in something identical to it. JCC Holley ultimately found that the Claimant was engaged in the course and scope of
employment when he sustained the injury, whether it was due to working a 17-hour shift or due to his supervisor attempting to crack the Claimant’s back. Each mechanism of injury took place while the Claimant was on the work premises during his shift while reasonably fulfilling the duties of employment by either working the grill or receiving pain relief assistance by his supervisor. The attempt to receive pain relief was not found to be a substantial deviation from employment or horseplay which would constitute actions outside of the course and scope of employment. Having also found that the Claimant had proven through competent substantial evidence that the industrial accident was the Major Contributing Cause (MCC) of the claimant’s low back injuries, JCC Holley granted compensability of same. IN THE
NOW | 11
for her back injury sustained in the work accident.
Williams v. Healthcare Cosmetology Services, Inc. OJCC Case No. 20-013230RLD (FL.Off.Judge.Comp.Cl. November 17, 2021)
By way of background, the Claimant worked for the Insured as a nail tech who did hair and nails. On the date of accident, the Claimant was working sitting in a chair preparing for her next customer who was scheduled for a manicure and
KK TAKEAWAY:
pedicure. The customer got off of an electric
There can be no basis for appointment of an
scooter to sit down in a chair, but her attendant
Expert Medical Advisor (EMA) where a party
turned the scooter on causing it to jump forward
fails to list witnesses/exhibits it is relying
and strike the Claimant. The scooter was then
upon to create a medical conflict that satisfies
turned off and pulled away from the Claimant,
§440.13(9).
but the attendant again turned it on and it jumped
BACKGROUND:
to the chair.
On November 17, 2021, JCC Dietz issued a
After about one (1) year of treatment, the
Final Compensation Order with regard to the
Employer/Carrier denied the Claimant’s request
Claimant’s request for continued medical care
for continued treatment based upon the Claimant
12 | IN THE
NOW
forward, landing on the Claimant and pinning her
being at Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI) and that she no longer required care medically necessary for any condition related to the work accident. On October 21, 2021, the Employer/Carrier filed a Motion to Appoint Expert Medical Advisor (EMA) based upon disputes in testimony between Dr. Brian Ziegler, the authorized treating physician, and the Employer/Carrier IME Dr. Steven Weber. The initial evaluation of whether the statutory
prejudice to the Claimant. The Claimant argued that there would be prejudice if a medical dispute were to be found based upon untimely filed evidence, as it would delay a ruling on the Petition for Benefits. Despite the Claimant’s attorney attending the deposition of Dr. Weber, JCC Dietz found prejudice to the Claimant, denied the Employer/Carrier’s motion, and ultimately ruled in the Claimant’s favor allowing her to seek postMMI palliative care.
requirements for appointment of an EMA is based in Florida Statute §440.13(9). This section states that “[i]f there is disagreement in the opinions of the health care providers, if two health care providers disagree on medical evidence supporting the employee’s complaints or the need for additional medical treatment, or if two health care providers disagree that the employee is able to return to work, the department may, and the judge of compensation claims shall, upon his or her own motion or within 15 days after receipt of a written request by either the injured employee, the employer, or the carrier, order the injured employee to be evaluated by an expert medical advisor.” JCC Dietz found that there was no basis for a disagreement requiring an appointment of an EMA, as Dr. Weber was not listed as a witness and his IME Report was not listed as an exhibit. Based upon the non-compliance with the Pretrial Stipulation, there was an absence of a disagreement based upon admissible evidence, and as such, there was no basis for appointment of an EMA. The Employer/Carrier made an Ore Tenus Motion to Amend the Pretrial Stipulation at the Final Hearing to add Dr. Weber’s deposition, CV, and medical records claiming that there was no IN THE
NOW | 13
MEET THE
CONTRIBUTORS Associated General Contractors (AGC), for which he was instrumental in having the Fort Lauderdale
Joshua T. Higgins, Esq.
office of Kelley Kronenberg designated as the host
Editor and Business Unit Leader/Partner
for the meetings in South Florida, and he is the legal
Email Joshua T. Higgins
advisor to the Safety Alliance for Excellence (SAFE) since its inception. He assists his clients daily in all aspects of claims handling, both prior to and after litigation has begun, and has handled complex matters through trial on numerous occasions, with
Joshua Higgins is a Business Unit Leader and Partner at Kelley Kronenberg where he focuses his practice on Workers’ Compensation defense. He has previous experience handling employment law matters, OSHA, Police Professional Litigation, Correctional Healthcare, and Civil Rights claims.
a high percentage of success. Joshua is a popular and frequent writer and presenter on various workers’ compensation issues, both in Florida and on a national level. For his success and reputation, he has been named a Florida Super Lawyers Rising star for 2020 and 2021 (bestowed
The team that Joshua leads comprises of nine (9)
on less than 2.5% of attorneys in Florida), was
people (attorneys, paralegals, and legal assistants),
named a 2020 and 2021 Top Lawyer in workers’
which collectively have over 90 years’ experience
compensation by Fort Lauderdale Illustrated (one
handling workers’ compensation matters in Florida.
of only two defense attorneys on the list), and was
Joshua handles workers’ compensation claims for a
named a 2022 Best Lawyers in America: Ones to
wide array of industries, for a clientele that ranges
Watch by U.S. News & World Report. Joshua is
from multi-billion companies to small employers.
also rated AV Preeminent by Martindale-Hubbell,
One of the primary industries Joshua handles
based upon peer reviews, which indicates that he
workers’ compensation claims for is the construction
has achieved the highest professional and ethical
industry. He represents general contractors and
standards and is the highest rating a lawyer can
subcontractors of all sizes, and is enmeshed in the
receive.
construction industry of South Florida. He is an
Prior to joining the firm, Joshua worked as an
active member of the Construction Association of
Assistant State Attorney at the State Attorney’s
South Florida (CASF), where he has been on the
Office, 17th Judicial Circuit, in both the felony trial
Young Leaders Committee for several years (and
unit and county court division. While there, Joshua
the firm is the legal advisor to), he is involved in the
tried more than 30 bench trials and 22 jury trials,
14 | IN THE
NOW
with his last trial featured on local Fox news.
Coast to Coast Legal Aid of South Florida doing
During law school at Nova Southeastern University,
foreclosure defense for indigent elderly citizens.
Joshua served for two years as the Chairperson of
Prior to entering law school, Joshua obtained his
Administration for the Moot Court Honor Society,
undergraduate degree magna cum laude from the
a Staff Member for the Inter-American Center for
State University of New York at Buffalo, where he
Human Rights, and the Secretary for the National
was selected for induction into the Phi Beta Kappa
Security and Law Society. He received a perfect
Society, received English Departmental Honors, and
score from the Chief Justice in the first round of the
was listed in Who’s Who Among American College
ABA National Appellate Advocacy Competition, and
Students. Additionally, Joshua was chosen as a
placed in the top 8 out of more than 125 students
Renaissance Scholar, an award bestowed on less
in the Feinrider Moot Court Competition. Further,
than 4% of graduates that year (only 82 students
Joshua was one of 40 law students selected
out of a class size of more than 2500), for those
nationwide as a summer fellow for the Florida
exhibiting scholarly excellence in at least two widely
Bar Foundation, which resulted in him working at
disparate areas of study.
Prior to joining the firm, he gained experience in
Brandon T. Haas, Esq. Associate Attorney Email Brandon Haas
Insurance Defense Litigation while working as a Law Clerk for a boutique Fort Lauderdale firm. Brandon received his Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Central Florida and went on to earn his Juris Doctor degree, summa cum laude, from Nova Southeastern University Shepard
Brandon Haas is an Attorney at Kelley Kronenberg
Broad College of Law where he regularly made the
where he assists in handling matters related to
Dean’s List and was both a Junior Associate and
Workers’ Compensation.
Executive Editor for Nova Law Review. While in
Brandon Haas is an Attorney in the firm’s Fort
law school, he was a Legal Intern for the Broward
Lauderdale office where he assists in handling
County Environmental and Consumer Protection
matters related to Workers’ Compensation.
Division and served as a Teaching Assistant.
IN THE
NOW | 15
HELPING YOU
STAY AHEAD
BLOGS
Hiring Choices Made Out of Desperation May Lead to Debacles Amy Siegel Oran. It is hard to pinpoint exactly why it is so difficult to find good employees these days; […]
Movies Speak to Me in Legalese By: Amy Siegel Oran. We all have our favorite movies, a top-five list of films you’ve seen so many times you […] CLICK TO READ MORE
CLICK TO READ MORE
Business Workplace Health & Safety Checklist: What Should Employers Expect with New Delta Variant Cases Rising? By: Meg Bentley. As the number of COVID-19 cases declined last spring, Illinois businesses reopened their doors […]
20 Years of Wisdom in 5 Bullets: Tips for Law Graduates By: Amy Siegel Oran. On this day, 20 years ago, I was worrying about law school finals and the upcoming […] CLICK TO READ MORE
CLICK TO READ MORE
Mental Health in the Workplace – Post Pandemic Panic By: Amy Siegel Oran Florida workers’ compensation law does not cover purely psychological trauma; the emotional condition must be brought […] CLICK TO READ MORE
16 | IN THE
NOW
6 Key Points to Defend, Manage, and Settle Catastrophic Claims By Amy Siegel Oran I recently had the pleasure of presenting on the topic of defending, managing, […] CLICK TO READ MORE
WEBINARS COVID-19 in 2021 Kelley Kronenberg Partners Adam Kemper and Joshua Higgins present COVID-19 in 2021 with Principal Partner/ Chief Financial Officer, Heath Eskalyo as the moderator. The webinar, COVID-19 in 2021, provides updates on the latest applicable workplace guidelines and for practice.
CLICK TO WATCH
PUBLICATIONS Don’t Be A Discovery Dinosaur HR Florida Newswire
Telecommuting Employees and the Potential for Workers’ Compensation Claims
Amy Siegel Oran
HR Florida Newswire
CLICK TO READ MORE
Indira Marin CLICK TO READ MORE
Guest column: Florida’s minimum wage increase raises workers’ compensation cost
What The Telecommuting Trend Could Mean for Florida Workers’ Comp Claims
Tampa Bay Business Journal
Insurance Journal
Amy Siegel Oran
Indira Marin
CLICK TO READ MORE
CLICK TO READ MORE
Yes, employees required to get vaccinated for COVID-19 can file a workers’ compensation claim for vaccine adverse effects
Does Workers’ Comp Cover an Employee’s Reaction to a COVID-19 Vaccine?
Verify
SHRM
Joshua Higgins
Joshua Higgins
CLICK TO READ MORE
CLICK TO READ MORE
IN THE
NOW | 17
AWARDS AND
ACCOLADES FIRM AWARDS Kelley Kronenberg has been the recipient of numerous awards and honors both firm-wide and for a number of our practices, including individual accolades. Below is a select list of recognition and awards:
2021
Best Midsize Law Firms To Work For
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Best Law Firms”
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
Named as a “Business of the Year” and “Top 100 Private Companies”
Best Multi-Practice Business Law Firm – USA
2021 “Diversity Team” winner
Ranked amongst the “Largest Law Firms”
18 | IN THE
Fastest-Growing Private Companies in America
NOW
WC ATTORNEY AWARDS
Martindale Hubbell AV Preeminent Rating
Best Lawyers in America: Ones to Watch
Karen M. Gilmartin, Raymond L. Grant, Joshua T. Higgins, Steven L. Scharf, Amy Siegel Oran
Joshua T. Higgins Amy Siegel Oran
Florida Super Lawyers “Rising Stars”
South Florida Legal Guide “Top Lawyers”
Joshua T. Higgins
Amy Siegel Oran Karen Gilmartin
Illinois Super Lawyers “Rising Stars” Julianna Walo Executive Women of the Palm Beaches Foundation Women in Leadership Amy Siegel Oran
Fort Lauderdale Illustrated “Top Lawyer” Joshua T. Higgins
WOMEN IN THE LAW Best Lawyers “Women in the Law”
Girl Scouts of Southeast Florida, Emerald Award, “Risk Taker” Amy Siegel Oran
Amy Siegel Oran IN THE
NOW | 19
A Firm Built on Relationships KELLEY KRONENBERG IS A MULTI-PRACTICE BUSINESS LAW FIRM.
with over
400
Employees
more than
175 Attorneys
the convenience of
12
Locations
Founded in 1980, the firm is one of the fastest-growing law firms in Florida and amongst the largest in the U.S. The firm serves all types and sizes of public and private companies, including small businesses and individuals nationwide.
OUR
OFFICES CHICAGO
NEW YORK NEW JERSEY
ATLANTA JACKSONVILLE DAYTONA ORLANDO
15
WEST PALM BEACH TALLAHASSEE FORT LAUDERDALE
OFFICES
NEW ORLEANS
TAMPA MIAMI LAKES NAPLES
MIAMI
CHICAGO
DAYTONA
FORT LAUDERDALE
JACKSONVILLE
10360 W. State Road 84 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33324 Phone: (954) 370-9970
10245 Centurion Parkway N, Suite 300 Jacksonville, FL 32256 Phone: (954) 370-9970
MIAMI
MIAMI LAKES
15100 NW 67th Avenue, Suite 204 Miami Lakes, FL 33014 Phone: (305) 826-7260
NAPLES
1111 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1900 Miami, FL 33131 Phone: (305) 503-0850
NEW ORLEANS
ORLANDO
TALLAHASSEE
150 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 800 Chicago, IL 60601 Phone: (312) 216-8828
20 North Orange Avenue, Suite 1207 Orlando, FL 32801 Phone: (407) 648-9450
1112 Riverside Drive Daytona Beach, FL 32117 Phone: (754) 888-5437
6267 Old Water Road, Suite 202 Tallahassee, FL 32312 Phone: (850) 577-1301
1421 Pine Ridge Road, Unit 120 Naples, FL 34103 Phone: (954) 370-9970
TAMPA
1511 North Westshore Blvd., Suite 400 Tampa, FL 33607 Phone: (813) 223-1697
201 St. Charles Ave, Suite 2500 New Orleans, LA 70170 Phone: (732) 547-7907
WEST PALM BEACH
1475 Centrepark Blvd., Suite 275 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone: (561) 684-5956
BY APPOINTMENT ONLY ATLANTA
1100 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30309 Phone: (404) 990-4972
NEW JERSEY
51 John F. Kennedy Parkway First Floor West Short Hills, NJ 07078 Phone: (908) 403-8174
NEW YORK CITY
One Liberty Plaza 165 Broadway 23rd Floor, Suite 2374 New York, NY 10006 Phone: (800) 484-4381
IN THE
NOW | 21
WWW.KKLAW.COM | 800.484.4381 | INFO@KKLAW.COM C h i c a g o | D a y t o n a | F o r t L a u d e r d a l e | J a c k s o n v i l l e | M i a m i | M i a m i L a k e s N a p l e s | N e w O r l e a n s | O r l a n d o | Ta l l a h a s s e e | Ta m p a | W e s t P a l m B e a c h
