TERRY SMALLS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION AND BUTLER CORPORATION, APPELLEES
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.
Terry Smalls was denied unemployment compensation benefits after voluntarily quitting a temporary construction job due to coworkers' profane language, which conflicted with his religious beliefs. The appeals court affirmed the denial, holding that his religious objections did not constitute 'good cause' for voluntary separation under Florida law.
The court held that Smalls' voluntary separation was not for 'good cause' under Florida law. The intensity of Smalls' religious conviction does not provide sufficient grounds for unemployment benefits, and the prior cases of Johnston and Knapp are factually distinguishable and do not compel a different result.
[1] Voluntary separation from employment for "good cause" is a prerequisite for the award of unemployment compensation benefits.
[2] An employee's religious conviction, without more, does not constitute "good cause" for voluntarily quitting employment.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“we cannot within the present factual setting follow either authority in the face of section 443.-101, Florida Statutes, which predicates the award of benefits upon voluntary separation from employment for "good cause."”
Establishes that benefits require good cause for voluntary separation under Florida law, and that religious conviction alone does not meet this standard.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSmalls applied for unemployment benefits and was referred to a two-week construction job. Before the two weeks ended, he quit because coworkers used p…
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 Unemployment Compensation Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Judge.
The appellant, Terry Smalls, has sought our review of an administrative order denying him unemployment compensation benefits. The essential facts disclose that after Smalls applied for unemployment compensation benefits he was referred to and accepted a two week period of employment in the construction industry. Well prior to the expiration of the two weeks, Smalls, who for religious reasons abhors obscene words, quit because of the language he was experiencing. Smalls did not seek corrective action by his employer and at his hearing before the appeals referee, he would not repeat the words he had heard. The referee was unable to determine whether such expressions would be considered abusive by a reasonable, able-bodied worker.
Thus, his entitlement to subsequent benefits was denied pending reemployment and the receipt of earnings in the amount of $1,547.00. In attempting to overturn the penalty period, Smalls relies upon Johnston v. Florida Department of Commerce, 340 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976) and Knapp v. National Convenience Store, 404 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
Although the result we reach may appear harsh when considered against the backdrop of the foregoing decisions, we cannot within the present factual setting follow either authority in the face of section 443.-101, Florida Statutes, which predicates the award of benefits upon voluntary separation from employment for “good cause.” We are unable to extract good cause from the intensity of Smalls’ religious conviction and we find no basis for disturbing the determinations reached by the Unemployment Appeals Commission.
Finally, Johnston and Knapp are factually, distinguishable from the matter at hand. In both cases the claimants were discharged from employment but in each instance the employee was accorded a brief period of continued employment beyond the moment of notice of termination. Johnston and Knapp, however, elected to sever their employment relationships prior to their respective termination dates. The First District in Knapp adopted the reasoning of the Fourth Disrict in Johnston: “If the employee is otherwise eligible for unemployment compensation benefits, his leaving work after he was given definite notice will not deprive him of those benefits dur ing the period of involuntary unemployment.” Johnston at 1230. Benefits, of course, were denied Johnston and Knapp for the accelerated intervals of separation from employment which each had voluntarily created.
Here, however, notwithstanding that Smalls’ -employment was for a fixed duration, it was he who abbreviated that period for a reason found not to constitute good cause. See Uniweld Products, Inc. v. Industrial Relations Commission, Florida Department of Commerce, Tallahassee, 277 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973).
Affirmed.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fran T. Brown v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Jacobs & Goodman, P.A., 633 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…Given what happened to the victim in her workplace, I do not agree that her reluctance to return to work was “supersensitive;” the “good cause attributable to the employer” test is plainly met. See also Smalls v. State, Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 485 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), rev. denied, 492 So. 2d 1335 (Fla.1986).5 I concur in the dissent of Dauksch, J., and would reverse the denial of unemployment compensation benefits. . "[H]is wife is the firm administrator, she's the one that hires and fires.”…
-
Sekinger v. Heritage Ins., Inc., 718 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…disqualification for unemployment benefits was not supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record. Therefore, we affirm the determination that Sekinger is not eligible for unemployment benefits. See Smalls v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 485 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Uniweld Prod., Inc. v. Industrial Relations Comm’n, 277 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). Affirmed. PARKER, C.J., and FRANK and FULMER, JJ., concur.…
-
O'Connor v. Fla. Blood Servs., Inc., 725 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…ence in the record supports the finding of disqualification for unemployment compensation benefits. Therefore, we affirm the determination that Ms. O’Connor is not eligible for unemployment benefits. See Smalls v. State, Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 485 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). THREADGILL, A.C.J., and BLUE and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Uniweld Prods., Inc. v. Indus. Relations Comm'n, 277 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973)
- Johnston v. Fla. Dep't OF Commerce, 340 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)
- Gary v. Knapp, 404 So. 2d 380 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)