Disanto v. State
817 So. 2d 946, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6878, 2002 WL 1021592
Opinion
Because there was competent, substantial evidence to support the Commission’s findings of fact, we affirm. Botner v. State, Dep’t of Admin. Div. of Ret., 438 So.2d 94, 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Division of Ret. v. Allen, 395 So.2d 1192, 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Kennedy v. Wiggins, 368 So.2d 454, 455-56 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Disanto v. State, 817 So. 2d 946, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6878, 2002 WL 1021592 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).
817 So. 2d 946 (Disanto v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Division of Retirement v. Allen
395 So. 2d 1192 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Kennedy v. Wiggins
368 So. 2d 454 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)
Botner v. State, Department of Administration, Division of Retirement
438 So. 2d 94 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)