NANCY J. SEKINGER, APPELLANT,
v.
HERITAGE INSURANCE, INC. AND FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Unemployment Benefits Eligibility cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Nancy Sekinger appeals the denial of her claim for unemployment benefits. The appeals referee found that Sekinger is not entitled to unemployment benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause attributable to the employer. See § 443.101, Fla. Stat. (1997). The Unemployment Appeals Commission affirmed the appeals referee’s decision. On appeal to this court, the commission’s order is entitled to a presumption of correctness. See Kelle v. D.H. Holmes Co., 658 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We find no legal error and Sekinger failed to show that the finding of 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.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gyuri Garcia v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 872 So. 2d 966 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)…employer’s interest tantamount to misconduct. We disagree. On appellate review, the Commission’s order, which adopted the decision of the appeals referee, is entitled to a presumption of legal correctness. See Sekinger v. Heritage Insurance, Inc., 718 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); Kelle v. D.H. Holmes Co., Ltd., 658 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). To successfully challenge any finding of the appeals referee, the appellant must show that it is not supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record.…
-
Nisbet v. Publix Super Mkts., Inc., 769 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…be paid for before it is consumed. The Unemployment Appeals Commission affirmed the appeals referee’s decision. On appeal, the Unemployment Appeals Commission’s order is entitled to a presumption of correctness. See Sekinger v. Heritage Ins., Inc., 718 So. 2d 358, 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). We find no legal error, and Nisbet failed to show that the finding of disqualification for unemployment benefits was not supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Morrow v. Alert Non-Emergency Transport, 725 So. 2d 4…
-
Valorie J. Rosier v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & S. Milling & Lumber, 873 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…eals Commission upheld the referee’s findings and conclusions and denied unemployment compensation benefits to Ms. Rosier. In the present appeal, “the commission’s order is entitled to a presumption of correctness.” Sekinger v. Heritage Ins., Inc., 718 So. 2d 358, 359 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). However, the decisions of the appeals referee and the commission may be set aside when the decisions depend “on any finding of fact that is not supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record.” § 120.68(7)(b), (10…
Authorities Cited
- Uniweld Prods., Inc. v. Indus. Relations Comm'n, 277 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973)
- T.H. v. State, 658 So. 2d 1161 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- Smalls v. State, 485 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)