MARIE M. HENRY, APPELLANT,
v.
CORDIS CORPORATION, ET AL., 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.
A claimant's threat of physical violence leading to discharge constitutes employment-related misconduct disqualifying them from unemployment benefits.
The claimant struck a coworker after friction developed and asked to be moved. Supervisors attempting to intervene were injured, and both the claimant…
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 Provocation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The claimant appeals the determination of misconduct which disqualified her from receiving unemployment compensation. We affirm.
The claimant worked closely with a coworker, Fleming. Friction developed between the pair and claimant asked to be rotated to another work unit. A supervisor determined and reported to the claimant that the move could not be accomplished for several days. Evidently, thereafter a dispute erupted and the claimant struck Fleming. Furthermore, two supervisors who attempted to intervene were injured. Both claimant and Fleming were discharged. In a separate proceeding, Fleming sought unemployment compensation and prevailed with the referee in that proceeding determining that the claimant here was the aggressor. Likewise, the referee in the instant case found the claimant was the aggressor and specifically rejected her defense of provocation or “hot blood.”
The present case is materially different from Davis v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 472 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) partly relied upon by the claimant. First, in Davis, the claimant was not found to be the instigator; second, the claim of “hot blood” substantiated in Davis, was specifically rejected by the referee herein. The instant case invokes the general rule, stated in Davis, that a claimant’s threat of physical violence directed at a fellow employee leading to the claimant’s discharge constitutes employment-related “misconduct” which dis-entitles the claimant to unemployment benefits. Accordingly, the order under review is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Earnest Jackson v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 730 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…not amount to misconduct); Davis v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 472 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (no misconduct even though claimant “may have shown bad judgment and over-reacted”; threat was “in hot blood”). But see Henry v. Cordis Corp., 626 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (affirming denial of benefits where claimant was found to be the aggressor). [*722] We find that the Commission erred in overturning the appeals referee’s decision awarding benefits. Although the Commission is entitled to reach a…
-
Robinson v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 899 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…r-turn such a fact finding when supported by competent, substantial evidence.3 Given that Robinson made such a threat, it clearly constitutes employment-related misconduct which disentitles him to unemployment benefits. Henry v. Cordis Corporation, 626 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). AFFIRMED. PLEUS and TORPY, JJ., concur. . See Anderson v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 822 So. 2d 563, 566 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Proffitt v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 658 So. 2d 185, 187 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). . Suluk…
-
Quintana v. Miami Pizza, Inc., 731 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Henry v. Cordis Corp., 626 So. 2d 1029 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Hines v. Dept. of Labor and Emp. Security, 455 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).…
Authorities Cited
- Davis v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., 472 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)