Couric v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission

590 So. 2d 539, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 12943, 1991 WL 267990
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 17, 1991·No. No. 91-1208·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Edmonson S. Couric, Jr., the former employer, appeals an order of the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission. As the conflicts in evidence were resolved by the trier of fact, and as the findings of fact are supported by substantial competent evidence, the judgment is affirmed. See Heifetz v. Department of Business Regulation, 475 So.2d 1277, 1281-82 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); §§ 120.57(l)(b)10, 120.68(10), Fla. Stat. (1989). We find no error in the referee’s treatment of the draft employment agreement introduced in evidence at the hearing, and agree with the Commission that the facts found by the referee do not show disqualifying misconduct on the part of the employee. See § 443.036(26), Fla. Stat. (1989); Hartenstein v. Florida Department of Labor & Employment Security, 383 So.2d 759, 761-62 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980).

Affirmed.

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

Couric v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 590 So. 2d 539, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 12943, 1991 WL 267990 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

590 So. 2d 539 (Couric v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hartenstein v. FLORIDA DEPT. OF LABOR, ETC.
383 So. 2d 759 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Heifetz v. Dept. of Business Regulation
475 So. 2d 1277 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)