Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (2026)

Disability retirement

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaMiss. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Codes, 1942, § 7446-16; Laws, 1952, ch. 299, § 16; Laws, 1968, ch. 578, § 3; Laws, 1977, ch. 450, § 3; Laws, 1978, ch. 382, § 1; Laws, 1986, ch. 472, § 1; Laws, 1991, ch. 513, § 5; Laws, 1992, ch. 576, § 4; Laws, 1993, ch. 617, § 5, 1995, ch. 627, § 3; Laws, 1996, ch. 472, § 4; Laws, 2002, ch. 627, § 9; Laws, 2007, ch. 407, § 5; Laws, 2011, ch. 469, § 3, eff. 7/1/2011.

Amended by Laws, 2016, ch. 397, HB 899, 10, eff. 7/1/2016.


Notes of Decisions
Cited in 61 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1984–2022 · leading case: Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Dishmon, 17 So. 3d 87 (Miss. 2009).
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Dishmon, 17 So. 3d 87 (Miss. 2009). · cites it 14× “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (Rev.2006). Dishmon then appealed the Medical Board ruling to the Disability Appeals Committee.”
PERS v. Dearman, 846 So. 2d 1014 (Miss. 2003). · cites it 5× “PERS contends the facts as presented in the record before this Court support the decision of the PERS Board of Trustees that Dearman is not entitled to the receipt of regular disability benefits pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113 . ¶ 8. Dearman claims the record contains no…”
PERS v. Howard, 905 So. 2d 1279 (Miss. 2005). · cites it 4× “The order from the PERS Board denying disability adopts the PERS Committee's findings of fact and conclusions of law based on Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113, which governs only regular disability.”
Pub. Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Dishmon, 797 So. 2d 888 (Miss. 2001). · cites it 3× “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(a) (1999). During her employment with DHS, Dishmon allegedly began to suffer from a host of health problems.”
Freeman v. Pers of Mississippi, 822 So. 2d 274 (Miss. 2002). · cites it 4× “The disabled retiree must undergo medical examinations as requested by the Board, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (3) (1999), to continue to receive disability benefits.”
Rebecca S. Davidson v. Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Mississippi, 219 So. 3d 577 (Miss. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 3× “Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (3). If, after such a reexamination, the PERS medical board finds and certifies that the disability retiree “is physically and mentally able to return to the employment from which [s]he is retired, the board of trustees .”
Stevison v. Pub. Employees'retire. Sys., 966 So. 2d 874 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 3× “Therefore, PERS had to determine whether Stevison was unable to perform the usual duties of employment due to mental or physical incapacity for the further performance of duty and whether such incapacity was likely to be permanent such that Stevison should be retired.”
Pub. Employees'Ret. Sys. v. Card, 994 So. 2d 239 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 3× “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(a) (citations omitted).”
Fulce v. Pub. Employees Ret. Sys., 759 So. 2d 401 (Miss. 2000). · cites it 3× “Under Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(3) (1999), individuals receiving a disability retirement allowance may be required to undergo subsequent periodic medical exams in order to determine if said individual is still disabled.”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Shurden, 822 So. 2d 258 (Miss. 2002). · cites it 2× “Shurden met the requirements prescribed by Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (1999), Shurden’s physician, Dr.”
Knight v. Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys., 108 So. 3d 912 (Miss. 2012). · cites it 2× “The dissent is correct in setting out that the “applicant must provide the Medical Board with sufficient ‘medical evidence’ to show that he or she is ‘mentally or physically incapacitated for the further performance of duty, that the incapacity is likely to be permanent, and…”
Flowers v. PERS, 952 So. 2d 972 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (Rev.2003); see Miss.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(a) — 18 cases
Pub. Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Dishmon, 797 So. 2d 888 (Miss. 2001). “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(a) (1999). During her employment with DHS, Dishmon allegedly began to suffer from a host of health problems.”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Dishmon, 17 So. 3d 87 (Miss. 2009). “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (Rev.2006). Dishmon then appealed the Medical Board ruling to the Disability Appeals Committee.”
PERS v. Howard, 905 So. 2d 1279 (Miss. 2005). “The order from the PERS Board denying disability adopts the PERS Committee's findings of fact and conclusions of law based on Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113, which governs only regular disability.”
Pub. Employees'Ret. Sys. v. Card, 994 So. 2d 239 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008). “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(a) (citations omitted).”
PERC v. Marquez, 774 So. 2d 421 (Miss. 2000).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(c) — 2 cases
PERS v. Dearman, 846 So. 2d 1014 (Miss. 2003). “PERS contends the facts as presented in the record before this Court support the decision of the PERS Board of Trustees that Dearman is not entitled to the receipt of regular disability benefits pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113 . ¶ 8. Dearman claims the record contains no…”
PERS v. Kellum, 878 So. 2d 1044 (Miss. Ct. App. 2004).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(e) — 5 cases
Stevison v. Pub. Employees'retire. Sys., 966 So. 2d 874 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007). “Therefore, PERS had to determine whether Stevison was unable to perform the usual duties of employment due to mental or physical incapacity for the further performance of duty and whether such incapacity was likely to be permanent such that Stevison should be retired.”
PERS v. Howard, 905 So. 2d 1279 (Miss. 2005). “The order from the PERS Board denying disability adopts the PERS Committee's findings of fact and conclusions of law based on Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113, which governs only regular disability.”
PERS v. Dearman, 846 So. 2d 1014 (Miss. 2003). “PERS contends the facts as presented in the record before this Court support the decision of the PERS Board of Trustees that Dearman is not entitled to the receipt of regular disability benefits pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113 . ¶ 8. Dearman claims the record contains no…”
Case v. Pub. Employees'Ret. Sys., 973 So. 2d 301 (Miss. Ct. App. 2008).
Flowers v. PERS, 952 So. 2d 972 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006). “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (Rev.2003); see Miss.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113(3) — 2 cases
Freeman v. Pers of Mississippi, 822 So. 2d 274 (Miss. 2002). “The disabled retiree must undergo medical examinations as requested by the Board, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113 (3) (1999), to continue to receive disability benefits.”
Fulce v. Pub. Employees Ret. Sys., 759 So. 2d 401 (Miss. 2000). “Under Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(3) (1999), individuals receiving a disability retirement allowance may be required to undergo subsequent periodic medical exams in order to determine if said individual is still disabled.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113(6) — 2 cases
Pub. Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Dishmon, 797 So. 2d 888 (Miss. 2001). “Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(1)(a) (1999). During her employment with DHS, Dishmon allegedly began to suffer from a host of health problems.”
Fulce v. Pub. Employees Ret. Sys., 759 So. 2d 401 (Miss. 2000). “Under Miss.Code Ann. § 25-11-113(3) (1999), individuals receiving a disability retirement allowance may be required to undergo subsequent periodic medical exams in order to determine if said individual is still disabled.”
— Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113(a) — 3 cases
Johnston v. PERS, 827 So. 2d 1 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002).
Knight v. Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys., 108 So. 3d 912 (Miss. 2012). “The dissent is correct in setting out that the “applicant must provide the Medical Board with sufficient ‘medical evidence’ to show that he or she is ‘mentally or physically incapacitated for the further performance of duty, that the incapacity is likely to be permanent, and…”
Pub. Emp. Ret. Sys. v. Mcclure, 968 So. 2d 510 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007).
— Miss. Code Ann. § 25-11-113(l)(a) — 5 cases
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Walker, 126 So. 3d 892 (Miss. 2013).
Knight v. Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys., 108 So. 3d 912 (Miss. 2012). “The dissent is correct in setting out that the “applicant must provide the Medical Board with sufficient ‘medical evidence’ to show that he or she is ‘mentally or physically incapacitated for the further performance of duty, that the incapacity is likely to be permanent, and…”
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Trulove, 954 So. 2d 501 (Miss. Ct. App. 2007).
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. v. Lang, 104 So. 3d 856 (Miss. Ct. App. 2012).
Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Mississippi v. Comardelle, 210 So. 3d 984 (Miss. Ct. App. 2015).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.