Carrillo v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission

775 So. 2d 430, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 261, 2001 WL 37726
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 17, 2001·No. No. 3D00-2610·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The claimant, Lissette V. Carrillo, appeals from the denial of unemployment benefits. We affirm.

The claimant has failed to successfully challenge the findings of fact that were made by the appeals referee because she cannot demonstrate that the findings are not supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Ford v. Southeast Atl. Corp., 588 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Based on the findings made by the appeals referee, the Unemployment Appeals Commission’s conclusion that the claimant was discharged for misconduct connected with work must be affirmed. See Tallahassee Housing Auth. v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 483 So.2d 413 (Fla.1986); Martinson v. Breit’s Tower Serv., Inc., 680 So.2d 599 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996).

Affirmed.

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

Carrillo v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 775 So. 2d 430, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 261, 2001 WL 37726 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

775 So. 2d 430 (Carrillo v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tallahassee Housing v. Unemp. Appeals Com'n
483 So. 2d 413 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
Martinson v. Breit's Tower Service, Inc.
680 So. 2d 599 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Ford v. Southeast Atlantic Corp.
588 So. 2d 1039 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)