ADONIA PIERRE, APPELLANT,
v.
ORIENTE SUGAR CANE PLANTING, INC., AND UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Timeliness Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Pierre contests an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission determining that he was required to repay $486 to the State of Florida. It appears from the record that appellant did not timely receive the initial notice of this determination pursuant to a misunderstanding as to the requirement that he notify the claims office of his change of address. He was therefore determined to be untimely in his attempt to perfect an appeal of this decision.
We believe under the circumstances of this case that appellant was denied due process of law in being unable to have his appeal determined on the merits, and accordingly we would reverse and remand for further proceedings. Miami Dolphins, Ltd. v. Florida Department of Commerce, 252 So. 2d 396 (Fla.3d DCA 1971); Polatnick v. Florida Department of Commerce, 349 So. 2d 203 (Fla.3d DCA 1977).
GUNTHER and STONE, JJ., and POLEN, MARK E., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Applegate v. Nat'l Health Care Affiliates, Inc., 667 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…2d 1323 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). There appear to be factual questions regarding whether appellant’s failure to receive notice was attributable to neglect on her part or an excusable misunderstanding. Compare Pierre v. Oriente Sugar Cane Planting, Inc., 504 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (reversing and remanding for further proceedings despite the employee’s untimely notice of appeal because the appellant had been denied due process of law under the particular circumstances of the case, specifically, the fact tha…
-
Kiwanis Club OF Little Havana, Inc. v. de Kalafe, 723 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…by failing to permit the jury to consider whether the agreement was modified. Whether a written contract has been modified by subsequent oral agreement or by course of dealing is a question of fact for the jury. Halbert v. First Realty Serv., Inc., 504 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). The court’s repeated erroneous instructions to the jury were tantamount to directing a verdict in de Kalafe’s favor. See Gencorp, Inc. v. Wolfe, 481 So. 2d 109, 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), review denied, 491 So. 2d 281 (Fla.1986).…
-
Burina Robinson v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Morrison, Inc., 526 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)…tice, nor did she receive a previously-mailed notice of the hearing before the appeals referee. Under these circumstances dismissal of her February 24, 1985 appeal constitutes a denial of due process. See Pierre v. Oriente Sugar Cane Planting, Inc., 504 So. 2d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); State ex rel. Owra v. Florida Department of Commerce, Division of Employment Security, 351 So. 2d 769 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Accordingly, I concur in the result attained by the majority opinion.…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Carroll, 252 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Piver v. Birman, 349 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)