Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Armstrong v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission

Armstrong v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission

886 So. 2d 246, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 15153, 2004 WL 2309971
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 15, 2004
DocketNo. 1D04-2722
StatusPublished

This text of 886 So. 2d 246 (Armstrong v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Armstrong v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 886 So. 2d 246, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 15153, 2004 WL 2309971 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED. See Raysor v. Raysor, 706 So.2d 400, 401 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)(“one who foregoes the opportunity to personally deliver time critical documents to the clerk, and instead elects to entrust those documents to postal authorities or some other delivery mechanism, does so at his or her own peril”); Coca Cola Foods v. Cordero, 589 So.2d 961 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)(holding that timely filing of a notice of appeal is required and that timely mailing will not suffice).

ERVIN, BOOTH and KAHN, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Raysor v. Raysor
706 So. 2d 400 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Coca Cola Foods v. Cordero
589 So. 2d 961 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
886 So. 2d 246, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 15153, 2004 WL 2309971, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armstrong-v-florida-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-2004.