Delaney v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Delaney v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

720 So. 2d 320, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14722, 1998 WL 796651

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 18, 1998

DocketNo. 98-0448

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 720 So. 2d 320 (Delaney v. 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

Delaney v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 720 So. 2d 320, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14722, 1998 WL 796651 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission, which reversed the referee’s decision finding that appellant was entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. In light of the nonspecific warning the employer gave to appellant concerning the consequences that [321]*321would be imposed if he continued to use company e-mail to transmit jokes, we hold that appellant’s subsequent e-mail containing a joke was a single act of poor judgment and not a willful or wanton disregard of an employer’s interests that would disqualify appellant from benefits. See Easton v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 693 So.2d 712 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

DELL, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the final order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission, which reversed the referee’s decision finding that appellant was entitled to unemployment compensation benefits. In light of the nonspecific warning the employer gave to appellant concerning the consequences that [321]*321would be imposed if he continued to use company e-mail to transmit jokes, we hold that appellant’s subsequent e-mail containing a joke was a single act of poor judgment and not a willful or wanton disregard of an employer’s interests that would disqualify appellant from benefits. See Easton v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 693 So.2d 712 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

DELL, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

720 So. 2d 320, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 14722, 1998 WL 796651, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delaney-v-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack