LORI ANN LEWIS, 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.
Lori Lewis appealed the Unemployment Appeals Commission's decision disqualifying her from unemployment benefits after she voluntarily resigned from her job as an animal keeper at a zoo. The court affirmed the disqualification, holding that Lewis failed to demonstrate good cause for quitting her job as required by Florida unemployment law.
The court held that competent substantial evidence supported the referee's finding that Lewis did not establish good cause for quitting her job. Under the applicable standard, Lewis failed to demonstrate reasons that would reasonably compel an average, able-bodied, qualified worker to resign.
[1] An appeals referee's findings of fact are supported by competent, substantial evidence when they are upheld on appeal.
[2] An individual is disqualified from unemployment benefits if they voluntarily left their work without good cause.
Previewing 2 of 6 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 [Appellant] was discharged for misconduct connected with work or voluntarily left work without good cause”
States the legal question presented to the appeals referee regarding the basis for unemployment disqualification
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLewis worked as a computer analyst for fifteen years before becoming unemployed. On March 29, 2007, she began working as an Education Animal Keeper at…
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 Quit Without Good Cause cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Lori A. Lewis [“Appellant”] has appealed the order of the Unemployment Ap peals Commission [“UAC”], affirming the referee’s decision to disqualify Appellant from receiving unemployment compensation benefits. We affirm.
Appellant became unemployed after working as a computer analyst for fifteen years. On March 29, 2007, she began working for the Central Florida Zoological Society Inc. [“Zoo”] as an Education Animal Keeper. On April 26, 2007, Appellant resigned from that position without giving notice or a reason. Subsequently, the Agency for Workforce Innovation determined that Appellant was ineligible to receive further unemployment benefits because she quit her job at the Zoo for a reason not attributable to her employer. Appellant appealed the claims adjudicator’s determination, contending that she quit for good cause — that she was not physically able to handle the duties of the job nor adequately trained. A telephonic hearing was held before an appeals referee to determine “whether [Appellant] was discharged for misconduct connected with work or voluntarily left work without good cause.” The referee found that Appellant left voluntarily due to dissatisfaction with the working conditions.
There is competent substantial evidence to support the referee’s finding that Appellant did not establish that she gave up her job for a reason that “would reasonably compel the average, able-bodied, qualified worker to give up his or her employment.” Spangler v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 632 So. 2d 98, 99 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). The testimony presented at the hearing before the referee indicates that Appellant was healthy but unaccustomed to physical labor; that she was informed about the requirements of her position before she accepted it; that she worked full-time as an animal keeper from March 29, 2007, to April 26, 2007; that she had not received any verbal or written warnings from the Zoo during her employment; that the Zoo had no reason to fire her at the time of her departure; that she considered her resignation a mistake; and that she tried to get her job back the next day.
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN, TORPY and LAWSON, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jerline Spangler v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 632 So. 2d 98 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)