Vitale v. Town of Surfside Pension Fund, 624 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). · Go Syfert
Search
Vitale v. Town of Surfside Pension Fund, 624 So. 2d 869 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Frank VITALE
v.
TOWN OF SURFSIDE PENSION FUND
No. 92-458.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Oct 12, 1993.
624 So. 2d 869
Klausner & Cohen and Robert D. Klausner (Hollywood), for petitioner., Cypen & Cypen and Myles G. Cypen and Stephen H. Cypen, Miami Beach, for respondent.
Cope, Ferguson, Hubbart.
Published

Lead Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Certiorari denied.

HUBBART and FERGUSON, JJ., concur.

Concurrence

COPE, Judge

(concurring).

I do not think this petition for writ of certiorari is procedurally barred. On the merits, I think it would be desirable if the definition of “disability retirement” contained in section 185.18, Florida Statutes (1991), applied to local law plans. However, paragraph 185.35(l)(f) allows a local law plan to incorporate disability benefits “as the municipality wishes.” As I see it, this phraseology allows the Town of Surfside to adopt its own definition of “disability” which is at variance from the definition used in section 185.18. Accordingly, I join in the denial of certiorari.