RHETT BESSIRE, APPELLANT,
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.
Appellant's appeal from unemployment disqualification was affirmed because he failed to provide a hearing transcript and the hiring letter evidence supported the employer's right to modify benefits.
An appellant who fails to provide a hearing transcript waives appellate review of factual findings, and where the record supports the lower decision, affirmance is proper.
[1] A party's failure to provide a hearing transcript on appeal waives appellate review of factual findings and prevents meaningful appellate scrutiny of agency decisions.
Previewing 1 of 1 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“Whether a claimant for unemployment benefits leaves his or her employment voluntarily and without good cause attributable to the employer is a question of fact, and thus should not be disturbed on appeal provided there is competent, substantial evidence supporting it.”
Establishing the standard of review for voluntary termination cases in unemployment appeals.
Bessire voluntarily left employment and was disqualified from unemployment benefits. He claimed good cause based on his employer reducing benefits con…
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 Benefits Claim cases and more on FLexlaw
PLEUS, J.
Rhett Bessire, pro se, appeals from a final order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission (“UAC”) affirming a decision of an appeals referee disqualifying Bessire from receiving benefits because he voluntarily left work without good cause. Bes-sire argues that he did have good cause to quit because his employer reduced his ben efits contrary to the terms outlined in his hiring letter. “Whether a claimant for unemployment benefits leaves his or her employment voluntarily and without good cause attributable to the employer is a question of fact, and thus should not be disturbed on appeal provided there is competent, substantial evidence supporting it.” Cain v. Unemployment Appeals Com’n, 876 So. 2d 592, 593 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Bessire failed to have the hearing transcribed and made part of the record on appeal and waived his opportunity to supplement the record with the transcript by failing to timely request a transcript from the UAC. See Estrada v. Unemployment Appeals Com’n, 693 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Because Bessire failed to provide a transcript of the proceedings below, we have no basis from which to determine whether the UAC erred in affirming the decision of the appeals referee. See Rozell v. State, Unemployment Appeals Com’n, 752 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Indeed, the evidence that is in the record — the hiring letter — supports the decision of the appeals referee because it made clear that the employer could change the benefit structure at any time.
Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.
SAWAYA, C.J., and THOMPSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Freddy Estrada v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 693 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
- Rozell v. State, 752 So. 2d 99 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Meridith R. Cain v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 876 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)