Astete v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission

116 So. 3d 637, 2013 WL 3336889, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 10601
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 3, 2013·No. No. 3D12-1712·Published

Opinion

SHEPHERD, J.

We reverse the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission’s order denying benefits to Percy Astete, and remand for reinstatement of the Referee’s order. See Anderson v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 822 So.2d 563, 567 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (stating “where there is competent, substantial evidence to support the referee’s findings of fact, the commission may not reweigh the evidence and substitute its findings of fact for those of the referee”); Orange Bank v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 611 So.2d 107, 108 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (“While the commission has the authority to reverse the findings and conclusions of the appeals referee, the commission may only do so where there is no substantial, competent evidence to support the referee’s decision”); accord Barreto v. Taco Bell Corp., 661 So.2d 874 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).

Reversed and remanded.

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

Astete v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission, 116 So. 3d 637, 2013 WL 3336889, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 10601 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

116 So. 3d 637 (Astete v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Anderson v. Unemployment Appeals Com'n
822 So. 2d 563 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Orange Bank v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COM'N
611 So. 2d 107 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Barreto v. Taco Bell Corp.
661 So. 2d 874 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)