SKILL JEWELRY INCORPORATED, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA 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 reversed the Unemployment Appeals Commission's decision and reinstated the appeals referee's denial of unemployment benefits, holding that the referee's findings were supported by competent substantial evidence beyond hearsay.
An appeals referee's findings denying unemployment benefits must be upheld if supported by competent substantial evidence, even if hearsay was presented, provided non-hearsay evidence corroborates the referee's credibility determinations.
[1] An appeals referee's findings of fact denying unemployment benefits must be accepted by the Unemployment Appeals Commission if supported by competent substantial evidence…
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“Although hearsay is admissible for the purpose of explaining or supplementing other evidence, a denial of benefits cannot be based exclusively on hearsay evidence.”
Establishing the standard for hearsay evidence in unemployment benefits proceedings
A claimant sought unemployment benefits after voluntarily leaving employment. The appeals referee denied benefits, finding the claimant left without g…
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 Voluntary Departure From Employment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant seeks review of a final order of the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission which reversed the appeals referee’s decision that the claimant was not entitled to unemployment benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause attributable to the employer. The Commission reversed on the ground that the referee had relied solely upon hearsay, which was insufficient to rebut the claimant’s testimony. Although hearsay is admissible for the purpose of explaining or supplementing other evidence, a denial of benefits cannot be based exclusively on hearsay evidence. Tassone v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 662 So. 2d 1003, 1004-05 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). We conclude that other non-hearsay evidence was presented at the hearing which supported the referee’s findings that the claimant’s testimony lacked credibility and that the claimant voluntarily left his employment to accept other work. The Commission must accept the findings of the appeals referee if they are supported by competent substantial evidence. Walz v. Reggie’s Seafood & BBQ House, Inc., 718 So. 2d 861, 862 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Because the referee’s decision was supported by competent substantial evidence, we reverse the Commission’s order and remand with directions that the Commission reinstate the referee’s decision. See Syncrolift Rolls Royce v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 869 So. 2d 639, 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Tassone, 662 So. 2d at 1005.
REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.
WEBSTER, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Frank J. Tassone, Jr., P.A. v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n & Bonnie A. Houldson, 662 So. 2d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Walz v. Reggie's Seafood & BBQ House, Inc., 718 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Syncrolift Rolls Royce v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 869 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)