Nickols v. Division of Retirement
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1DissentWebster, Judge
I am unable to agree with the majority’s decision. Initially, I note that the issue resolution of which the majority concludes mandates reversing the decision of the State Retirement Commission (Commission) was not raised by appellant. The only issue raised is whether the record contains competent, substantial evidence to support the Commission’s conclusion that appellant failed to carry his burden of establishing that he is “totally and permanently disabled.” My review of the record satisfies me that it does contain competent, substantial evidence to support the Commission’s conclusion.…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Holly v. AuldSupreme Court of Florida · 1984
- A. R. Douglass, Inc. v. McRainey, as Admrx.Supreme Court of Florida · 1931
- Polyglycoat Corp. v. Hirsch Distrib., Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- American Bankers Life Assur. Co. of Fla. v. WilliamsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1968
- Streeter v. SullivanSupreme Court of Florida · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.