ILIANA J. BALKANSKI, APPELLANT,
v.
DOUBLE J OF BROWARD, INC., AND FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, APPELLEES
PER CURIAM.
Iliana Balkanski (“Balkanski”), appeals the Unemployment Appeals Commission’s order affirming the appeal referee’s decision disqualifying Balkanski from receiving unemployment benefits. We reverse.
There is no substantial competent evidence that Balkanski left her employment without good cause attributable to her employer. See Wood v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 927 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Kelly v. Dade County Sch. Bd., 872 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Lewis v. Lakeland Health Care Ctr., Inc., 685 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). Accordingly, we reverse the order disqualifying Balkanski from receiving unemployment benefits.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Holborough v. State, 103 So. 3d 221 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…at a non-testifying witness has furnished the police with evidence of the defendant’s guilt.’ ” Florence v. State, 905 So. 2d 989, 990 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (quoting Schaffer v. State, 769 So. 2d 496, 499 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)); accord Cedillo v. State, 949 So. 2d 339, 341 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Torres v. State, 870 So. 2d 149, 150 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Diaz v. State, 62 So. 3d 1216, 1217 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). The statement of one person to another as to his identity is hearsay that does not fall under the section 90…
-
Diaz v. State, 62 So. 3d 1216 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…ly identified by the victim. This type of testimony is hearsay, and should not be admitted at trial.1 Wilding v. State, 674 So. 2d 114, 119 (Fla.1996), receded from on other grounds, Devoney v. State, 717 So. 2d 501 (Fla.1998); see Cedillo v. State, 949 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (admitting hearsay statement through officer reversible error where officer’s testimony implied that non-testifying witness made accusatory statement against Cedillo). The State contends that any error in admitting the hearsay t…
-
Almond v. State, 1 So. 3d 1274 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…ilt, the testimony is hearsay and cannot be admitted to show the sequence of events in an investigation because its probative value is out-weighed by its prejudicial effect); see also Keen v. State, 775 So. 2d 263, 273 (Fla.2000); Cedil-lo v. State, 949 So. 2d 339, 340 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). The trial court also erred in admitting Appellant’s written statement before the State had established the corpus delicti of the charged crime. Bassett v. State, 449 So. 2d 803, 807 (Fla.1984). Because the cumulative effe…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Lewis v. Lakeland Health Care Ctr., Inc., 685 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Kelly v. Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd., 872 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)
- Wood v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 927 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)