ERVIN WASHINGTON, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
BURDINES, AND DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, STATE OF FLORIDA, UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that there was substantial competent evidence to support the Unemployment Appeals Commission's order affirming the denial of unemployment benefits.
Appellant, a former employee, was discharged for intentionally failing to follow instructions from supervising personnel regarding taking a day off. T…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Misconduct Connected With Work cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDRY, Judge.
Appellant, a former employee of Bur-dines, seeks review of an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission which affirmed a decision of the appeals referee determining that appellant was ineligible for unemployment compensation benefits.
The findings of the appeals referee in this cause show that the appellant was discharged because he intentionally and repeatedly failed to follow specific instructions regarding work, given by appropriate supervising personnel. On September 11, 1981, appellant was specifically instructed by the vice-president of personnel that before taking the following day off for a floating day, appellant was to speak directly to the assistant operations manager to seek and obtain permission. The appellant deliberately failed to obey the instructions and took the day off anyway. The following day he was discharged. The record and findings of the referee show that for no justifiable reason the appellant’s behavior demonstrated a clear, consistent pattern of insubordination.
The appeals referee is the fact finder in unemployment claims procedure. Section 443.07(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1979). If the record shows that there was substantial competent evidence to support the factual findings of the appeals referee then the decision must be upheld.
Appellant’s sole contention on appeal is that there is not substantial competent evidence in the record and a reasonable basis in law to support the findings of the referee and Commission that he was discharged for misconduct connected with his work.
We cannot agree with the appellant’s contention and hold that there was substantial competent evidence to support the Commission’s order. Fort Myers Pump and Supply, Inc. v. Florida Department of Labor and Employment Security, 373 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); Lundy’s Market, Inc. v. Florida Department of Commerce, Division of Employment Security, 373 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
The order appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thurber v. Hillier & Wanless, P.A., 642 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)…meaning of the unemployment compensation law. We agree with the Commission that the referee correctly applied the law to the facts. See Dorisma v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 544 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Washington v. Burdines, 422 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); City of Riviera Beach v. Florida Department of Commerce, 372 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). AFFIRMED. WARNER, PARIENTE, JJ., and SMITH, FREDRICKA G., Associate Judge, concur. . In section 443.036(26), Florida Statutes, misco…
-
Dickerson v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Capitol Holding Agency Grp., Inc., 646 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…a. 3d DCA 1982), Sanchez’s failure to report to work because of non-emergency sinus surgery was accompanied by Sanchez’s repeated inability to report for work promptly and frequent verbal altercations with other employees. In Washington v. Burdines, 422 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), Washington took an unauthorized day off after deliberately failing to ask permission of a supervisor. Dickerson’s conduct, however, is much more akin to that in which an employee, with no prior record of warnings for absenteeism…
-
Margia R. Forte v. Florida Unemployment Appeals, 899 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…agan v. Williams Island, 568 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)(noting that, on one or two previous occasions, claimant had previously failed to notify his supervisor of an absence and on these occasions received verbal warnings); Washington v. Burdines, 422 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)(noting a "clear, consistent pattern of insubordination”); City of Riviera Beach v. Florida Dep't of Commerce, Div. of Employment Sec., 372 So. 2d 1007, 1008 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)(noting that, out of forty-seven working days, claiman…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fort Myers Pump & Supply, Inc. v. Fla. Dep't OF Labor & Emp. Sec., 373 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- Mathis v. State, 373 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Lundy's Mkt., Inc. v. Fla. Dep't OF Commerce, 373 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)