## Facts

- Bradley Westphal, a City of St. Petersburg firefighter/paramedic, suffered a severe work-related back injury in December 2009.
- He received medical care and temporary total disability (TTD) benefits under Florida’s workers’ compensation law.
- Florida law limited TTD benefits to 104 weeks or until maximum medical improvement (MMI), whichever occurred first.
- At the end of 104 weeks, Westphal remained totally disabled and unable to work, but had not reached MMI.
- Westphal sought additional temporary benefits or, alternatively, permanent total disability (PTD) benefits.
- A Judge of Compensation Claims denied PTD benefits because Westphal could not yet establish permanent total disability at MMI, leaving him without wage-replacement benefits despite continued total disability.
- The First District Court of Appeal (en banc) upheld the 104-week limit by construing the statute to treat a worker as at MMI “by operation of law” at 104 weeks to permit immediate pursuit of PTD.
- The Florida Supreme Court reviewed a certified question concerning the statute’s constitutionality under the Florida Constitution’s access-to-courts guarantee.

## Issues

1. Whether Florida Statutes § 440.15(2)(a) (2009), as applied to a worker still totally disabled but not at MMI after 104 weeks, violates article I, section 21 of the Florida Constitution by creating an indefinite gap with no wage-loss remedy.
2. If unconstitutional, what remedy is appropriate to restore constitutionally adequate temporary disability coverage.

## Decision

- The Florida Supreme Court quashed the First District’s en banc decision.
- The Court held the 104-week limitation on TTD benefits in § 440.15(2)(a) unconstitutional as applied to Westphal and others similarly situated.
- The Court rejected the First District’s interpretation deeming MMI to occur “by operation of law” at 104 weeks.
- To cure the constitutional defect, the Court revived the pre-1994 260-week TTD limit and remanded for further proceedings.

## Legal Principles

- Florida’s workers’ compensation system is constitutionally permissible only if it remains a reasonable alternative to tort litigation under article I, section 21 (access to courts).
- A statutory scheme that cuts off temporary total disability benefits while the worker remains totally disabled and not at MMI, and that delays PTD eligibility, can deny access to courts by leaving the worker without wage-replacement benefits for an indefinite period.
- MMI is a medical determination; it cannot be imposed as a legal fiction solely to preserve a statutory time cap where medical evidence does not support MMI.
- When a benefit limitation is unconstitutional for denying meaningful access to courts, an appropriate judicial remedy may include revival of a prior statutory benefit duration that restores a constitutionally adequate period of temporary benefits.

## Conclusion

The Florida Supreme Court held that the 104-week cap on temporary total disability benefits was unconstitutional as applied because it could leave severely injured workers totally disabled yet without wage-loss benefits for an indefinite period; the Court remedied the defect by restoring a 260-week TTD limit and remanding for further proceedings.


Westphal v. City of St. Petersburg, 194 So. 3d 311 (Fla. 2016)