VINCENT OLLER, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
DIVISION OF RETIREMENT, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 1982-06-11
No. AG-92
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and ERVIN, J., concur.
415 So. 2d 801 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1982) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Topics
Permanent Total Disability Competent Substantial Evidence

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Permanent Total Disability cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
MILLS, Judge.

MILLS, Judge.

Oiler appeals an order of the State Retirement Commission finding that he is no longer totally and permanently disabled. We affirm.

The Commission found by a preponderance of the evidence that Oiler is capable of “rendering useful and efficient service as an officer or employee” and thus not totally and permanently disabled, Section 121.-091(4)(b), Florida Statutes (1981). This finding is supported by competent substan tial evidence. Amico v. Division of Retirement, 352 So. 2d 556 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).

Section 121.091(4)(b) does not provide total disability retirement for an officer or employee who is capable of performing useful and efficient service within the state system. The fact that Oiler is incapable of returning to his duties as a policeman does not entitle him to the extraordinary benefits provided by this section. Shepard v. Division of Retirement, 361 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).

ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C. J., and ERVIN, J., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Mauldin v. State, 468 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
    …r employee” in the statute indicates that it is disability from employment within the system that is intended. This construction is consistent with the language of the statute and accords with this court’s holding in Oller v. Division of Retirement, 415 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), wherein it was stated that “[sjection 121.091(4)(b) does not provide total disability retirement for an officer or employee who is capable of performing useful and efficient service within the state system.” (emphasis added).1…
  • State v. Hissom, 476 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
    …of employment outside the system. We agree with this inter [*245] pretation of Section 121.091(4)(e) by the Commission in the context of a termination proceeding, finding it consistent with this court’s decisions in Oller v. Division of Retirement, 415 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), and Mauldin v. State, Department of Administration, Division of Retirement, 468 So. 2d 332, 335 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Taken together, Oiler and Mauldin stand for the proposition that the “useful and efficient service” standard, r…
  • Sandie Johnson v. Dep't OF Mgmt. Servs., 24 So. 3d 792 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)
    …appeal followed. The standard of review for determinations of whether a claimant for disability retirement benefits is totally and permanently disabled is whether the finding is supported by competent, substantial evidence. Oller v. Div. of Ret., 415 So. 2d 801, 801-02 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Amico v. Div. of Ret., Dep’t of Admin., 352 So. 2d 556, 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). As a non-vested member of the Florida Retirement System, Ms. Johnson was entitled to in-line of duty disability benefits only if her inju…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw