FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION AND KATIE M. SWANGO, APPELLEES
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 Florida Department of Environmental Protection appealed an unemployment benefits determination, but the court dismissed the appeal for lack of standing because DEP was the prevailing party below and thus not aggrieved by the order.
The appeal was dismissed for lack of standing because DEP obtained a wholly favorable judgment below and therefore lacked standing to appeal.
[1] An appeal of a wholly favorable judgment must be dismissed because the appealing party is not aggrieved thereby.
[2] A party who prevails in an administrative proceeding cannot appeal an order that is wholly in their favor.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“An appeal of a wholly favorable judgment must be dismissed.”
Establishes the core standing principle requiring dismissal of DEP's appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department of Economic Opportunity determined that a claimant was eligible for unemployment benefits as of April 24, 2011, and that DEP must reimb…
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 Eligibility cases and more on FLexlaw
The Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) seeks review of an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission, predecessor to the Florida Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.1 We directed the parties to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed as moot. Having considered the responses to the order to show cause, we dismiss the appeal.
The Department of Economic Opportunity determined the claimant was eligible for benefits as of April 24, 2011, and that DEP must reimburse the Unemployment Compensation Trust Fund should any benefits be paid. DEP challenged the rede-termination. The appeals referee affirmed “[t]hat portion of the determination dated October 3, 2011, holding the claimant qualified for benefits,” but expressly concluded that the “separation of employment [wa]s not attributable to the employer [DEP]; therefore, the employer remains non-charged.” The Commission affirmed the decision of the appeals referee, concluding the “record adequately supported] the referee’s material findings and the referee’s conclusion [wa]s a reasonable application of the pertinent laws to the material facts of the case.”
We dismiss this appeal for lack of standing. “An appeal of a wholly favorable judgment must be dismissed.” Dep’t of Health v. Fresenius Med. Care Hold *1155 ings, Inc., 935 So.2d 636, 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). See also Friends of Perdido Bay, Inc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 44 So.3d 650, 651 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010) (dismissing cross-appeal, after appellants voluntarily dismissed appeal, because cross-appellants were the prevailing parties below and were neither adversely affected by any provision of the order under review nor faced any consequences by the application of the challenged statutory provision); Fla. Comm’n on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology v. State, Dep’t of Ins., 716 So.2d 345, 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (declining to examine an administrative law judge’s rationale for a ruling at the behest of the party in whose favor the administrative law judge ruled); Gen. Dev. Utils., Inc. v. Fla. Pub. Serv. Comm’n, Div. of Admin. Hearings, 385 So.2d 1050, 1051 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (“It is a long standing rule that a judgment or decree wholly in favor of a party may not be appealed by him, for he is not aggrieved thereby.”).
DISMISSED.
BENTON, C.J., THOMAS, and ROWE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't of Revenue v. Calixto Manuel Lopez, 252 So. 3d 823 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)…ation to their child. See §409.2557(1) & (2), Fla. Stat. (2017). We dismiss this appeal for lack of standing. “‘An appeal of a wholly favorable judgment must be dismissed.’” Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot. v. Fla. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Comm’n, 123 So. 3d 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (quoting Dep’t of Health v. Fresenius Med. Care Holdings, Inc., 935 So. 2d 636, 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)); ---PAGE 2--- 2 see also Friends of Perdido Bay, Inc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envtl. Prot., 44 So. 3d 650, 651 (Fla. 1st DCA 201…1 / 2
-
State v. Smathers, 264 So. 3d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Bell v. State, 935 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)
- Fla. Comm'n on Hurricane Loss Projection Methodology v. State, 716 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Gen. Dev. Utils. Inc. v. Fla. Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 385 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Friends OF Perdido BAY, Inc. v. Fla. Dep't of Env't Prot., 44 So. 3d 650 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)