City of Hollywood v. Nickerson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

City of Hollywood v. Nickerson

830 So. 2d 917, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 17150, 2002 WL 31557690

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 20, 2002

DocketNo. 4D02-892

StatusPublished

This text of 830 So. 2d 917 (City of Hollywood v. Nickerson) 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

City of Hollywood v. Nickerson, 830 So. 2d 917, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 17150, 2002 WL 31557690 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellee was an employee of the City of Hollywood from December 16, 1963 through March 23, 1984. We agree with the City that Ordinance No. 0-2001-03 did not change appellee’s conditions of retirement to allow him to obtain pension benefits when he turned fifty-five. Unlike the provision for a two percent cost of living adjustment, there is no express statement in the ordinance making the other provisions of it retroactive in all situations. Section 2 of the ordinance states that it “shall be effective retroactive to July 1, 1999.” If we were to construe the ordinance as appellee suggests, then this section would be meaningless. We therefore reverse the final summary judgment and remand to the circuit court for further proceedings.

STONE, GROSS and STERN, KENNETH D., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellee was an employee of the City of Hollywood from December 16, 1963 through March 23, 1984. We agree with the City that Ordinance No. 0-2001-03 did not change appellee’s conditions of retirement to allow him to obtain pension benefits when he turned fifty-five. Unlike the provision for a two percent cost of living adjustment, there is no express statement in the ordinance making the other provisions of it retroactive in all situations. Section 2 of the ordinance states that it “shall be effective retroactive to July 1, 1999.” If we were to construe the ordinance as appellee suggests, then this section would be meaningless. We therefore reverse the final summary judgment and remand to the circuit court for further proceedings.

STONE, GROSS and STERN, KENNETH D., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

830 So. 2d 917, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 17150, 2002 WL 31557690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-hollywood-v-nickerson-fladistctapp-2002.