Castillo v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission
This text of 785 So. 2d 552 (Castillo 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.
Opinion
Diana E. CASTILLO, Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, et al., Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Scott Trell, Miami, for appellant.
John D. Maher (Tallahassee), for appellees.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and LEVY and RAMIREZ, JJ.
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
We hold that the appellant-employee's actions, whichat worstamounted to a failure to comply with a superior's directive to produce a written statement about a work-related incident, as a matter of law, did not constitute disqualifying misconduct. See § 443.036(29), Fla. Stat. (2000); Baca v. Unique Originals, Inc., 724 So.2d 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Chery v. Flagship Airlines, Inc., 692 So.2d 213 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Underhill v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., 610 So.2d 48 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review denied, 624 So.2d 267 (Fla.1993). Accordingly, the decision below denying unemployment compensation benefits is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to award the appellant the full amount of benefits claimed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
785 So. 2d 552, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 1773, 2001 WL 167017, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castillo-v-florida-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-2001.