1. The EMA statute in Florida, which appoints expert medical advisers to resolve conflicts in medical opinions in workers’ compensation cases, has been found to be constitutional in the case of Abreu v. Riverland Elementary School and Broward County School Board.
2. The case involved a claimant who had suffered a shoulder injury at work and had conflicting medical opinions regarding the need for further surgery.
3. The judge appointed an EMA to resolve the conflict, and based on the EMA’s opinion, the request for surgery was denied.
4. The claimant challenged the constitutionality of the EMA statute, both facially and as applied, but the court found the statute to be constitutional. 1. The First District Court of Appeal ruled that the EMA statute did not violate Florida’s separation of powers doctrine.
2. The statute did not violate the Claimant’s procedural due process rights because the EMA’s presumption was not irrebuttable and did not completely deny the right to present evidence and be heard.
3. The Court rejected the argument that the statute violated equal protection rights under Florida law and the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
4. The EMA statute has faced multiple challenges, but none have been successful so far.
5. This is the first time the Court has written a lengthy opinion explaining why the statute is constitutional.
6. The possibility of the case being brought before the Florida Supreme Court exists, and further updates will be provided if that happens.
FLORIDA’S EXPERT MEDICAL ADVISER (EMA) STATUTE IS CONSTITUTIONAL
Leave a Reply