MAUDE W. WOODS AND LUCY B. BYRD, APPELLANTS,
v.
SAM GOLDSTEIN ET AL., APPELLEES
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.
This case reviews an order denying a petition for certiorari, which sought to overturn the discharge of two former city employees. The appellate court affirmed the denial, finding substantial evidence supported the personnel board's decision.
No, the trial court did not err. There was substantial competent evidence to support the Personnel Board's findings, and the appellants failed to demonstrate any departure from applicable law by the trial judge.
“Inherent in the trial court's denial of the relief sought by certiorari was a. finding that there was substantial competent evidence to support the findings of the Personnel Board.”
Establishes the basis for the trial court's decision to deny certiorari.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants, former employees of the City of Miami Beach, were discharged for habitual absence from duty and absence without leave. They petitioned for…
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 Presumption Of Correctness cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants, former employees of the City of Miami Beach, seek review of an order denjdng their petition for certiorari directed to the Miami Beach Personnel Board, which upheld their discharge from employment because of habitual absence from duty and for absence without leave.
Inherent in the trial court’s denial of the relief sought by certiorari was a. finding that there was substantial competent evidence to support the findings of the Personnel Board. See: Hammond v. Curry, 153 Fla. 245, 14 So.2d 390; Nelson v. State ex rel. Quigg, 156 Fla. 189, 23 So.2d 136; Pauline v. Lee, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 359. The order of the trial court arrived in this' court with a presumption of correctness. See: Salter v. Knowles, Fla.App.1957, 97 So.2d 138; Lenchner v. City of Miami Beach, Fla.App.1963, 156 So.2d 767. It was incumbent upon the appellants to demonstrate error in the action of the trial court.. See: Morris v. City of Hialeah, Fla.App. 1962, 140 So.2d 615; Lenchner v. City of Miami Beach, supra.
*466From a review of the record in this case, it is apparent that there was substantial competent evidence to support the action of the Personnel Board, particularly when the parties stipulated that the appellants were absent without appropriate leave under the personnel rules and, the appellants having failed to indicate where the trial judge departed from the applicable law, the order denying their writ of certiorari is therefore affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jones v. City OF Hialeah, 294 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…ted to the question whether or not the circuit court applied the applicable principles of law, and not whether error was committed before the Personnel Board. Morris v. City of Hialeah, Fla.App.1962, 140 So. 2d 615; Woods v. Goldstein, Fla.App.1965, 174 So. 2d 465; Katz v. State Board of Medical Examiners, Fla.App.1967, 201 So. 2d 805. Appellants have raised two points in their brief filed in this court, which were likewise contained in their briefs filed in circuit court. The first point challenges the admi…
Authorities Cited
- Pauline v. LEE, 147 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Nelson v. State, 156 Fla. 189 (Fla. 1945)
- Hammond v. Curry, 153 Fla. 245 (Fla. 1943)
- Morris v. City OF Hialeah, 140 So. 2d 615 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Salter v. Knowles, 97 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 1957)
- Murray Lenchner v. City OF Miami Beach, 156 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)