Smith-Ernst, Inc. v. Odom

289 So. 2d 393
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJanuary 17, 1974
DocketNo. 44136
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 289 So. 2d 393 (Smith-Ernst, Inc. v. Odom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Smith-Ernst, Inc. v. Odom, 289 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 1974).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have for review on writ of certiora-ri a decision of the Industrial Relations Commission which affirmed an Order of the Judge of Industrial Claims awarding the claimant attorney’s fees for additional benefits being paid by the employer/carrier. Having heard oral argument, we find the Industrial Relations Commission properly affirmed the Judge of Industrial Claims under the particular circumstances of this case on the authority of Ford v. Cunningham-Limp Co., 203 So.2d 326 (Fla.1967), and Boyd v. Southeastern Utilities Service Co., 172 So.2d 817 (Fla.1965). We find no departure from the essential requirements of law.

... According, the writ of certiorari is discharged.

It is so ordered.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur. DEKLE, J., dissents.

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

Related

Honeywell, Inc. v. Scully
289 So. 2d 393 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
289 So. 2d 393, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-ernst-inc-v-odom-fla-1974.