Viele v. Division of Retirement

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Viele v. Division of Retirement

642 So. 2d 1124, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9037, 1994 WL 502592

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 16, 1994

DocketNo. 93-1649

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 642 So. 2d 1124 (Viele v. Division of Retirement) 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

Viele v. Division of Retirement, 642 So. 2d 1124, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9037, 1994 WL 502592 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The decision of the Retirement Commission which finds appellant Richard Viele not entitled to retirement benefits for disability (adjustment disorder with depression) arising in the line of duty is supported by competent substantial evidence and therefore affirmed. The history given by appellant to his psychiatrist, Dr. Mhatre, was rejected by the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission was not bound by Dr. Mhatre’s opinions which were, according to Mhatre, based upon the doctor’s acceptance of Mr. Viele’s version of untoward actions and threats by two of his superiors. The Commission determined that the actions Viele alleged never occurred.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF and KAHN, JJ., concur. ERVIN, J., dissents with written opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

The decision of the Retirement Commission which finds appellant Richard Viele not entitled to retirement benefits for disability (adjustment disorder with depression) arising in the line of duty is supported by competent substantial evidence and therefore affirmed. The history given by appellant to his psychiatrist, Dr. Mhatre, was rejected by the Commission. Accordingly, the Commission was not bound by Dr. Mhatre’s opinions which were, according to Mhatre, based upon the doctor’s acceptance of Mr. Viele’s version of untoward actions and threats by two of his superiors. The Commission determined that the actions Viele alleged never occurred.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF and KAHN, JJ., concur. ERVIN, J., dissents with written opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

642 So. 2d 1124, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9037, 1994 WL 502592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/viele-v-division-of-retirement-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack