Barber v. City of Daytona Beach

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Barber v. City of Daytona Beach

614 So. 2d 669, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2381, 1993 WL 53139

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 2, 1993

DocketNo. 92-738

StatusPublished

This text of 614 So. 2d 669 (Barber v. City of Daytona Beach) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barber v. City of Daytona Beach, 614 So. 2d 669, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2381, 1993 WL 53139 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of the judge of compensation claims. A judge of compensation claims has jurisdiction pursuant to section 440.21, Florida Statutes, to consider an award of additional compensation to offset illegal deductions of pension benefits when pension benefits have been reduced to the extent of workers’ compensation payments. Barragan v. City of Miami, 545 So.2d 252 (Fla.1989). In Barragan and the line of cases which have followed, the judge of compensation claims was not faced with the issue of whether a claimant was entitled to a disability pension, but only with the issue of whether such benefits were improperly reduced by the amount of workers’ compensation benefits. A judge of compensation claims does not have jurisdiction to make the initial determination of whether an employee is eligible for benefits pursuant to a plan for disability retirement. See §§ 440.02(6), 440.13, 440.15, and 440.25(1), Fla.Stat.

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN, SMITH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order of the judge of compensation claims. A judge of compensation claims has jurisdiction pursuant to section 440.21, Florida Statutes, to consider an award of additional compensation to offset illegal deductions of pension benefits when pension benefits have been reduced to the extent of workers’ compensation payments. Barragan v. City of Miami, 545 So.2d 252 (Fla.1989). In Barragan and the line of cases which have followed, the judge of compensation claims was not faced with the issue of whether a claimant was entitled to a disability pension, but only with the issue of whether such benefits were improperly reduced by the amount of workers’ compensation benefits. A judge of compensation claims does not have jurisdiction to make the initial determination of whether an employee is eligible for benefits pursuant to a plan for disability retirement. See §§ 440.02(6), 440.13, 440.15, and 440.25(1), Fla.Stat.

AFFIRMED.

ERVIN, SMITH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

614 So. 2d 669, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 2381, 1993 WL 53139, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barber-v-city-of-daytona-beach-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack