Dronca v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dronca v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission

889 So. 2d 1011, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 20233, 2004 WL 3015207

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 30, 2004

DocketNo. 1D03-3694

StatusPublished

This text of 889 So. 2d 1011 (Dronca 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.

Bluebook

Dronca v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 889 So. 2d 1011, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 20233, 2004 WL 3015207 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the decision of the Unemployment Appeals Commission, which concluded that the claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits under sections 443.036(29) and 443.101(l)(a)2., Florida Statutes (2003). The record shows that [1012]*1012the claimant’s conduct was a single incident of poor judgment, which .justified the employer’s termination of the claimant’s employment, but did not amount to misconduct sufficient to deny the claimant benefits. See Powell v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 886 So.2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); McCarty v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 878 So.2d 432, 435 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Ash v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 872 So.2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

REVERSED and REMANDED with directions to award claimant unemployment compensation benefits.

ERVIN, PADOVANO and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the decision of the Unemployment Appeals Commission, which concluded that the claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits under sections 443.036(29) and 443.101(l)(a)2., Florida Statutes (2003). The record shows that [1012]*1012the claimant’s conduct was a single incident of poor judgment, which .justified the employer’s termination of the claimant’s employment, but did not amount to misconduct sufficient to deny the claimant benefits. See Powell v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 886 So.2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); McCarty v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 878 So.2d 432, 435 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Ash v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 872 So.2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

REVERSED and REMANDED with directions to award claimant unemployment compensation benefits.

ERVIN, PADOVANO and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

889 So. 2d 1011, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 20233, 2004 WL 3015207, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dronca-v-florida-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack