Fowler v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Fowler v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

670 So. 2d 1202, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3559, 1996 WL 165406

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 10, 1996

DocketNo. 95-2541

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 670 So. 2d 1202 (Fowler 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

Fowler v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 670 So. 2d 1202, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3559, 1996 WL 165406 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

FARMER, Judge.

We reverse the final order of the UAC denying benefits upon the referee’s finding that the claimant lacked good cause to terminate her employment for reasons attributable to her employer. The referee erred in excluding evidence offered by the claimant to support her contention that her employer had engaged in a continuing pattern of “harassment, retaliation, and discrimination,” which we take to refer to sexual harassment and invidious discrimination against her in the terms and conditions of her employment. We disagree with the referee’s implicit finding that such conduct by an employer would not confer good cause on the employee enduring such conduct to terminate her employment without prejudice to her right to unemployment benefits.

REVERSED FOR NEW EVIDENTIARY HEARING.

GUNTHER C.J., and WARNER, J., concur.

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

FARMER, Judge.

We reverse the final order of the UAC denying benefits upon the referee’s finding that the claimant lacked good cause to terminate her employment for reasons attributable to her employer. The referee erred in excluding evidence offered by the claimant to support her contention that her employer had engaged in a continuing pattern of “harassment, retaliation, and discrimination,” which we take to refer to sexual harassment and invidious discrimination against her in the terms and conditions of her employment. We disagree with the referee’s implicit finding that such conduct by an employer would not confer good cause on the employee enduring such conduct to terminate her employment without prejudice to her right to unemployment benefits.

REVERSED FOR NEW EVIDENTIARY HEARING.

GUNTHER C.J., and WARNER, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

670 So. 2d 1202, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3559, 1996 WL 165406, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fowler-v-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack