VAN A. BLANCHARD, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF CHARLES H. BLANCHARD, DECEASED, APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF PENSACOLA, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed dismissal of a former police officer's action seeking reexamination of his 1962 discharge, holding that his right to such review under a 1976 special statute was extinguished when the statute was repealed in 1978 before he pursued an effective judicial remedy.
A statutory right to reexamine grounds for discharge and potentially restore pension rights does not survive repeal of the statute creating that remedy when the employee failed to seek judicial enforcement during the statute's operative period.
[1] A statutory right to administrative review of employment discharge is not preserved after repeal of the statute creating that right when the employee failed to pursue jud…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCharles Blanchard was discharged from the City of Pensacola for misconduct in 1962. In 1976, the legislature passed a special act creating a right to …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Pension Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the'circuit court’s final summary judgment dismissing appellant’s action to require the City of Pensacola to reexamine the grounds for Charles Blanchard’s discharge for misconduct in 1962. The right to that review by the City, which might have restored Blanchard’s pension rights upon a finding that Blanchard’s misconduct did not amount to a felony, was created by a special act passed in 1976, 14 years after Blanchard’s discharge. Ch. 76-468,'Laws of Florida. Two years later, effective June 29, 1978, that statute was repealed. Ch. 78-591, Laws of Florida. Within the two-year period in which Blanchard was arguably entitled to the review he now seeks, and which the City resisted, Blanchard did not seek an appropriate judicial remedy for the City’s refusal to reopen the case. In that period Blanchard did file a petition for writ of mandamus having that purpose, but this Court held that mandamus did not lie. Rein v. Blanchard, 353 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA, December 20, 1977, reh. den. January 13,1978). Since the 1976 special act did not revest Blanchard’s pension in any sense, but gave him a remedy that he did not effectively enforce before it was withdrawn by the legislature, the circuit court was correct, in the judgment now here for review, in holding that Blanchard’s right of review did not survive the repeal of the special act creating that remedy. See Bureau of Crimes Compensation, Department of Labor and Employment Security v. Williams, 405 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981).
AFFIRMED.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., C.J., and SHIVERS and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bureau of Crimes Comp. v. Cary J. Williams, 405 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- Rein v. Blanchard, 353 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)