CROMWELL ROBERTS, MARIA A. ANDRES, ANTONIO I. GARCIA, NELSON J. FLORES, AND ROGES ADAIN, APPELLANTS,
v.
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.
Indigent appellants appealing denial of unemployment compensation benefits sought free transcripts of administrative hearings from the Unemployment Compensation Commission. The court denied the motions, finding no statute or rule obligated the Commission to provide transcripts at no cost, but certified the issue to the Florida Supreme Court as a matter of great public importance.
There is no statute or rule provision that obligates the Unemployment Compensation Commission to prepare transcripts or furnish them without cost to indigent appellants in unemployment compensation cases.
[1] A statute or rule provision must obligate an agency to prepare transcripts before a requirement to furnish them without cost can arise.
[2] Indigent appellants in non-criminal cases are generally not entitled to free transcripts under statutory provisions for indigent relief.
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“there is no statute or rule provision which obliges the Commission to prepare the transcripts in question”
Establishes the core holding that no legal obligation exists for the Commission to provide transcripts
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCromwell Roberts, Maria A. Andres, Antonio I. Garcia, Nelson J. Flores, and Roges Adain are indigent appellants appealing the denial of unemployment c…
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
On Motions to Compel Preparation of Transcripts at No Cost
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The appellants, who are indigents appealing from the denial of unemployment compensation benefits, have moved that the Unemployment Compensation Commission provide them with transcripts of their administrative hearings without charge. We believe that there is no statute or rule provision which obliges the Commission to prepare the transcripts in question, see § 120.57(l)(b)6, Fla.Stat. (1983); Smith v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 504 So. 2d 801 (Fla.2d DCA 1987), and thus no requirement that they be furnished without cost under section 443.-041(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1983), as the appellants claim. Banfield v. United States Sugar Corp., 506 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); see Harris v. Department of Corrections, 486 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (indigent appellants in non-criminal cases not entitled to free transcripts under section 57.081, Florida Statutes (1980)); Curran v. Florida Probation and Parole Commission, 498 So. 2d 629 (Fla.3d DCA 1986) (same); see also Harrell v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 361 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978) (same under pre-1980 version of section 57.081); Bower v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Co., 347 So. 2d 439 (Fla.3d DCA 1977) (same). The motions before us are therefore denied.
Like the courts in Banfield, Smith, Harrell and Curran, we deem the issue presented one of great public importance. We therefore certify the following question, identical to that framed in Banfield, to the Supreme Court: Whether a claimant in an unemployment compensation case may be charged a fee by the unemployment appeals commission for the provision of a transcript of the agency hearing.
Motions denied; question certified.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rica Gretz v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 572 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 1991)…accurately and completely preserve all testimony in the proceeding, and, on the request of any party, it shall make a full or partial transcript available at no more than actual cost.” The commission cites Roberts v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 512 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), and Smith v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 504 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), quashed, 573 So. 2d 320 (Fla.1991), for the proposition that section 120.-57(l)(b) only requires that the agency preserve “testimony”…
-
Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n v. Rica Gretz, 519 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…of administrative proceedings or to copy documents and records, the charge for these actions is not a “fee” prohibited by section 443.041(2)(a). We reverse on the basis of the Third District’s holding in Roberts v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 512 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), that there is no statute or rule requiring the Commission to prepare transcripts for indigent claimants appealing the denial of unemployment compensation benefits and, thus, no requirement that they be furnished without cost unde…
-
Martinez v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 528 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…On Motion To Provide Transcript PER CURIAM. Following Roberts v. Umemployment Appeals Comm’n, 512 So. 2d 212 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), we deny the application of the appellant, an indigent who seeks review of the denial of her claim for unemployment compensation benefits, that she be furnished the transcript of proceedings below without charge. We certify this d…
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
- Harrell v. State, 361 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Bower v. Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. & Asta Membership Grp. Plan, 347 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Harris v. Dep't OF Corr., 486 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Curran v. Fla. Prob. & Parole Comm'n, 498 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Smith v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 504 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Banfield v. United States Sugar Corp., 506 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)