GENADY P. CHEREPANOV, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed FIU's withholding of $1,894.65 from Dr. Cherepanov's final salary for an unauthorized Paris conference ticket purchased without a supporting grant source.
A university may withhold travel expenses from an employee's final salary when the employee failed to identify a stable and ongoing grant source to support the expense, as required by university policy.
[1] An employer may withhold travel expenses from an employee's final compensation when the employee failed to comply with the requirement to identify a stable and ongoing gr…
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 intelligenceDr. Cherepanov requested reimbursement for a round-trip ticket to Paris for an educational conference. The University paid for the ticket based on his…
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 Chapter 120 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Dr. Genady P.Cherepanov seeks reimbursement of $1,894.65 from Florida International University (FIU), which was withheld from his final salary warrant. Dr. Cherepanov had purchased a round trip ticket to Paris to attend an educational conference. The travel authorization request designated and specified an account so the ticket was paid for by the University. Dr. Cherepanov had attended other foreign conferences and knew or ought to have known that he was obligated to identify a stable and ongoing grant source, in order for FIU to initially defray the expense. As it turned out, there was no underlying grant to support Dr. Cherepa-nov’s request. For this reason, in the final' salary warrant payable to the professor, the cost of the ticket was withheld by the University. Dr. Cherepanov filed the appropriate papers that triggered a Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, hearing before a hearing officer who found from competent and substantial evidence of the above salient facts. The President of the University ultimately adopted the recommended order as the University’s Final Order. It is clear that the University followed the internal procedures for processing and withholding this money. There being competent substantial evidence to support the order, it is affirmed.1
. In the event the ticket is in the University’s possession, it should be turned over to Dr. Cherepanov for whatever residual value it may have.