PAMELA J. ATCITTY, 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.
The court held that the Unemployment Appeals Commission's decision was supported by substantial competent evidence and therefore must be affirmed.
Pamela J. Atcitty appealed an order affirming her disqualification from unemployment benefits. The appellate court reviewed the decision of the Unempl…
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 Competent Substantial Evidence Standard Of Review cases and more on FLexlaw
MONACO, J.
Pamela J. Atcitty appeals an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission affirming the decision of a referee that disqualified her from benefits. We affirm.
We review decisions of the Unemployment Appeals Commission to determine whether they are supported by substantial competent evidence. See Forte v. Florida Unemployment Appeals, 899 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). If they are so supported, the findings may not be disturbed on appeal. See Walukiewicz v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 861 So. 2d 1288, (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Brown v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 633 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 642 So. 2d 1362 (Fla.1994), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1082, 115 S.Ct. 733, 130 L.Ed.2d 636 (1995). Concomitantly, an appeal referee’s findings in an unemployment compensation case are to be accorded a presumption of correctness. See Szniatkiewicz v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 864 So. 2d 498, 501 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). In reviewing whether the record contains competent, substantial evidence to support the appeal referee’s findings, we cannot make credibility determinations, nor can we substitute our judgment for that of the referee. See Id. Thus, the referee’s decision must be upheld where there is competent substantial evidence to support the decision. Id.
After a careful review of the record before us, we have concluded that it contains substantial competent evidence in support of the decision of the Unemployment Appeals Commission in this case, as well as the referee’s findings. Under the circumstances, therefore, we must affirm.
AFFIRMED.
SHARP, W. and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Szyja Szniatkiewicz v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Herco Holding Corp., 864 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- Fran T. Brown v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Jacobs & Goodman, P.A., 633 So. 2d 36 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
- Walukiewicz v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 861 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Peterson v. Fisher, 513 U.S. 1082 (U.S. 1995)
- L. E. S. Props. v. Westin Hotel Co., 513 U.S. 1082 (U.S. 1995)
- Margia R. Forte v. Florida Unemployment Appeals, 899 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)