City of Miami v. Ogle

600 So. 2d 31, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6992, 1992 WL 123326
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 9, 1992
DocketNo. 91-1117
StatusPublished

This text of 600 So. 2d 31 (City of Miami v. Ogle) 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 Miami v. Ogle, 600 So. 2d 31, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6992, 1992 WL 123326 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order on appeal for the reasons expressed in our opinion in City of Miami v. Burnett, 596 So.2d 478 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992).

Appellee, the claimant below, has filed an amended motion for appellate attorney’s fees. In our discretion we grant the motion. We remand the matter to the judge of compensation claims to determine the amount of attorney’s fees. We note that this is another of the cases involving the City of Miami’s pension offset ordinance and the briefs which have been filed are largely duplicative of other work. We direct the JCC’s attention to that part of our opinion in Burnett which dealt with appellate attorney’s fees.

JOANOS, C.J., and BOOTH and SHIVERS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

City of Miami v. Burnett
596 So. 2d 478 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
600 So. 2d 31, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6992, 1992 WL 123326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-miami-v-ogle-fladistctapp-1992.