Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi v. Comardelle
Court of Appeals of Mississippi
1DissentCarlton, J.
¶21. I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision because I would affirm the circuit court’s finding that the denial of duty-related retirement disability benefits was not based upon substantial evidence. Like the circuit court, I find that PERS’s denial of Comardelle’s benefits was arbitrary and lacked support by substantial credible evidence. I also respectfully submit that PERS’s decision was based upon speculation.
¶ 22. “Employees of the State of Mississippi are eligible for regular disability benefits and duty-related benefits.” Pub. Employees’ Ret. Sys. v. Trulove, 954 So.2d 501,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- PERC v. MarquezMississippi Supreme Court · 2000
- PERS v. DearmanMississippi Supreme Court · 2003
- PERS v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2001
- Public Employees' Retirement System v. TruloveCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2007
- Henley v. Public Employees' Retirement System of MississippiCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2010
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.