Estrada v. Unemployment Appeals Com'n
This text of 693 So. 2d 1091 (Estrada v. Unemployment Appeals Com'n) 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
Freddy ESTRADA, Appellant,
v.
UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
*1092 Freddy Estrada, Orlando, pro se.
John D. Maher, Tallahassee, for Appellee Unemployment Appeals Commission.
PER CURIAM.
In this pro se appeal, Freddy Estrada challenges the final order entered by the Unemployment Appeals Commission (UAC), affirming the decision rendered by the appeals referee that he is not entitled to receive unemployment compensation benefits. Estrada maintains that the UAC's decision should be reversed because the appeals referee's findings of fact are not supported by competent substantial evidence. However, Estrada has failed to provide this court with a transcript of the hearing conducted by the appeals referee. As a result, this court is not able to review this claim of error. See Wright v. Wright, 431 So.2d 177 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) (the findings and judgments of the lower tribunal come to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness and the appellant has the burden of submitting an adequate record to support his appeal).
We note that after the briefs in this matter were submitted, Estrada filed with this court a "Motion to Furnish Transcript of Hearing," in which he requested that he be allowed to supplement the record with a transcript of the hearing conducted by the appeals referee. Importantly, the day after Estrada filed his notice of appeal, the UAC advised him that a transcript would be prepared for him at no cost upon his request and that, if he wished to have a transcript prepared, it was his responsibility to make the request within ten days of the appeal. No such request was made. Thus, Estrada was given ample opportunity to furnish a transcript, but he declined to do so. We recognize that rule 9.200(f), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, provides in part that "[n]o proceeding shall be determined, because of an incomplete record, until an opportunity to supplement the record has been given." However, we decline to apply the rule here, because Estrada waived his opportunity by failing to timely request a transcript from the UAC.
AFFIRMED.
COBB, W. SHARP and ANTOON, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
693 So. 2d 1091, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5403, 1997 WL 255336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/estrada-v-unemployment-appeals-comn-fladistctapp-1997.