Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Loveless v. Mapco Express

Loveless v. Mapco Express

644 So. 2d 182, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10472, 1994 WL 588177
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 28, 1994
DocketNo. 93-3979
StatusPublished

This text of 644 So. 2d 182 (Loveless v. Mapco Express) 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
Loveless v. Mapco Express, 644 So. 2d 182, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10472, 1994 WL 588177 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judge of compensation claims has the exclusive authority to evaluate the credibility of witnesses, weigh the evidence and resolve [183]*183conflicts in the testimony. We find competent substantial evidence to support the judge’s order. Her determinations concerning the credibility of witnesses are within her authority and do not appear to be clearly arbitrary and unreasonable. See, Batka v. Duff's Smorgasbord, 560 So.2d 377, 379 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and Bray v. Electronic Door-Lift, Inc., 558 So.2d 43, 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN and DAVIS, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.

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

Related

Bray v. Electronic Door-Lift, Inc.
558 So. 2d 43 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Batka v. Duff's Smorgasbord
560 So. 2d 377 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
644 So. 2d 182, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10472, 1994 WL 588177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loveless-v-mapco-express-fladistctapp-1994.