Case ID: so2d_206/html/0386-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Clifton S. REED, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION et al., Respondents.
    No. 36626.
    Supreme Court of Florida.
    Jan. 31, 1968.
    Masterson, Lloyd, Sundberg & Rogers, and David T. Henniger, St. Petersburg, for petitioner.
    Billy L. Rowe, of Harrison, Greene, Mann, Davenport, Rowe & Stanton, St. Petersburg, Patrick H. Mears, Tallahassee, and J. Franklin Garner, Lakeland, for respondents.
   PER CURIAM,

By petition for a writ of certiorari we have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date June 22, 1967.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is, therefore, dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 32 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law.

The petition is, therefore, denied.

The petition for attorneys’ fees filed by Petitioner is also denied.

THOMAS, Acting C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.