BRIDGET A. PANZER, APPELLANT,
v.
PERSONNEL ONE, INC. AND FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, 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.
The court affirmed the Unemployment Appeals Commission's order because the appellant failed to provide a sufficient record, specifically a transcript, to demonstrate error.
The appellant was disqualified from unemployment benefits. She appealed the Commission's affirmation of the appeals referee's determination, arguing s…
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 Burden Of Proof On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Bridget A. Panzer appeals the order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission affirming the appeals referee’s determination that she is disqualified from receiving benefits, arguing that she did not voluntarily leave employment.
Panzer had the burden to establish that the Commission erred in affirming the appeals referee’s determination. See Wolfson v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 649 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (citing Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979)). Panzer essentially challenges the findings of the appeals referee. She, however, has not provided this court with a transcript of the hearing. Consequently, with the scant record on appeal, she has not overcome the presumption of correctness. See id. Without a transcript of the hearing before the appeals referee, there is no basis from which we can determine whether the Commission erred in affirming the appeals referee’s findings. We, therefore, must affirm. See Rozell v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 752 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
For this same reason, we cannot ascertain whether Panzer is correct in asserting that the amount of overpayment exceeds the amount she actually received. Moreover, the attachment supporting her contention was not part of the record provided to this court by the Commission. Thus, it appears not to have been considered by the appeals referee or the Commission, and therefore, it would be improper for this court to consider it on appeal.
Affirmed.
PARKER, A.C.J., and FULMER and GREEN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cuebas v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 765 So. 2d 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…gs and determination. The UAC contends that not having furnished this court a transcript of the proceedings before the appeals referee, Ms. Cuebas cannot prevail. The UAC’s contention is correct as a matter of law. See Panzer v. Personnel One, Inc., 754 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). A claimant has the right to appeal the findings and determination of an appeals referee when affirmed by the UAC. We have jurisdiction to review such an appeal. Fla. R.App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(C). The notice of appeal is filed with t…
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Wolfson v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 649 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Quinton Collier v. State, 649 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Rozell v. State, 752 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)