Ferguson v. Miami-Dade County

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ferguson v. Miami-Dade County

890 So. 2d 450, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 20038, 2004 WL 3000968

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 29, 2004

DocketNo. 3D04-631

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 890 So. 2d 450 (Ferguson v. Miami-Dade County) 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

Ferguson v. Miami-Dade County, 890 So. 2d 450, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 20038, 2004 WL 3000968 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Jacquelyn Ferguson appeals the Florida Commission on Human Relations’ dismissal of her claims of sexual harassment, retaliatory discharge and unlawful discharge from her employment. In the present case conflicting testimony was offered by the parties at the hearing before the administrative law judge. It was the responsibility of the administrative law judge to resolve the conflicts, which he did in this case in favor of the employer. See Wallace v. Zahn Dental Co., Inc., 618 So.2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). This court is not allowed to overturn the administrative law judge’s factual findings, as long as there was competent, substantial evidence at the hearing which supports the findings. See § 120.68, Fla. Stat. (2004); Gonzalez v. Master Flowers, Inc., 605 So.2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). As we see no legal basis on which to disturb those findings, the order now before us is affirmed. See also St. Augustine Church v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commn., 754 So.2d 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Stahl v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commn., 502 So.2d 78 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Jacquelyn Ferguson appeals the Florida Commission on Human Relations’ dismissal of her claims of sexual harassment, retaliatory discharge and unlawful discharge from her employment. In the present case conflicting testimony was offered by the parties at the hearing before the administrative law judge. It was the responsibility of the administrative law judge to resolve the conflicts, which he did in this case in favor of the employer. See Wallace v. Zahn Dental Co., Inc., 618 So.2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). This court is not allowed to overturn the administrative law judge’s factual findings, as long as there was competent, substantial evidence at the hearing which supports the findings. See § 120.68, Fla. Stat. (2004); Gonzalez v. Master Flowers, Inc., 605 So.2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). As we see no legal basis on which to disturb those findings, the order now before us is affirmed. See also St. Augustine Church v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commn., 754 So.2d 183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Stahl v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commn., 502 So.2d 78 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

890 So. 2d 450, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 20038, 2004 WL 3000968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferguson-v-miami-dade-county-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack