Florida’s Heart/Lung Bill: A Cardiologist’s Guide for Attorneys
Section 112.18 creates a presumption for firefighters, law enforcement and correctional officers. Understanding the medicine makes the statute easier to apply.
6 min read
Florida Statute §112.18, commonly called the Heart/Lung Bill, recognises that certain public-safety work carries cardiovascular and respiratory risks. For covered employees, it creates a presumption that qualifying conditions resulting in disability or death were suffered in the line of duty. For attorneys on either side, the statute’s framework is familiar; the medicine underneath it is often where cases are won or lost.
The framework in brief
Claims under §112.18 generally turn on four questions: whether the condition is one the statute covers, such as hypertension or heart disease; whether the employee belongs to a protected class; whether a pre-employment physical examination failed to reveal evidence of the condition; and whether the condition resulted in disability. When those elements are met, the presumption applies, and the question becomes whether it can be rebutted with competent evidence.
Where the medicine matters
The pre-employment physical. Much turns on what the baseline examination actually recorded. Blood pressure readings, ECGs, laboratory values and the examining physician’s notes need to be read carefully and in context: a single elevated reading, a borderline finding or an incomplete examination can each be characterised very differently. A cardiologist’s review should explain what the baseline did and did not show, in plain terms.
Hypertension is a diagnosis, not a number. Contemporary guidelines define hypertension through repeated, properly obtained measurements over time. Distinguishing sustained hypertension from isolated readings, white-coat effects or episodes of hypertensive urgency is central to many §112.18 disputes, and the distinction should be documented from the records rather than assumed.
Heart disease covers a wide range. Coronary artery disease, cardiomyopathy, arrhythmia and valvular disease have different causes, different risk factors and different natural histories. Matching the specific diagnosis to the evidence — including imaging, catheterisation findings and the timeline of symptoms — is what gives an opinion its weight.
Rebuttal evidence. Arguments that a condition arose from non-occupational causes, such as family history, lifestyle factors or a separate medical condition, require careful causation analysis. An opinion that weighs these factors candidly is far more persuasive than one that simply lists them.
What attorneys should ask for
Whether representing a claimant or an employer, the most useful cardiology review in a §112.18 matter will: reconstruct the full medical chronology from the pre-employment physical forward; identify the precise diagnosis and the evidence supporting it; address each statutory element the medicine touches; and explain its reasoning in language a Judge of Compensation Claims can follow.
This article is general information about medical issues that arise under Florida law. It is not legal advice; statutory requirements and case law should be confirmed with counsel.