Disco 95, Inc. v. Calderone
This text of 427 So. 2d 1084 (Disco 95, Inc. v. Calderone) 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.
Opinions
The employee/carrier, having voluntarily dismissed their appeal, leave before us claimant’s cross-appeal challenging the constitutionality of Section 440.15(3). This statutory provision has been considered by the court in Carr v. Central Florida Aluminum Products, Inc., 402 So.2d 565 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), Acton v. Ft. Lauderdale Hospital, 418 So.2d 1099 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982), Mahoney v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 419 So.2d 754 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) and Alfred John v. GDG Seryices, Inc., 424 So.2d 114 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) and in each case has withstood the attack. Accordingly, the cross-appeal is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
427 So. 2d 1084, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 20203, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disco-95-inc-v-calderone-fladistctapp-1983.