MARIA LAZO, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 2000-12-20
No. 3D00-2227
Before GERSTEN, FLETCHER, and RAMIREZ, JJ.
776 So. 2d 963 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2000)

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.


Holding

The court held that the Unemployment Appeals Commission properly dismissed Lazo's appeal as untimely filed.


Facts & Procedural History

Lazo was terminated for misconduct (mishandling funds) and denied unemployment benefits. She filed a late appeal to the Commission, failed to respond …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Maria Lazo appeals the denial of her claim for unemployment compensation benefits based upon misconduct connected with work. We affirm.

Lazo was terminated from her employment at Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. for mishandling company funds. She was denied unemployment compensation benefits by the referee because her termination for misconduct disqualified her. The decision was mailed to her on April 10, 2000. On June 5, 2000, Lazo filed a late appeal to the Unemployment Appeals Commission. The Commission ordered Lazo to show cause why her appeal should not be dismissed because it was not timely filed. She did not respond. The Commission then dismissed her appeal as untimely filed.

After a careful review of the record, we conclude that the Commission properly dismissed Lazo’s appeal as untimely filed. To this date, Lazo has not shown why she failed to file her appeal in a timely fashion. Her ohly argument before us is an attack on the findings of the referee. Unfortunately, she has not provided us with a transcript which precludes our review of the referee’s findings of fact. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw