Garcia v. Roney Plaza Management Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Garcia v. Roney Plaza Management Corp.

777 So. 2d 418, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12052, 1999 WL 701706

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 8, 1999

DocketNos. 99-640, 98-7898

StatusPublished

This text of 777 So. 2d 418 (Garcia v. Roney Plaza Management Corp.) 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

Garcia v. Roney Plaza Management Corp., 777 So. 2d 418, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12052, 1999 WL 701706 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

SHEVIN, Judge.

Manuel Garcia appeals an order denying him unemployment compensation benefits. We reverse. Mr. Garcia refused to sign a written reprimand; however, he served the imposed disciplinary suspension. Upon returning to work, he again refused to sign a reprimand that was issued for his failure to sign the first reprimand. He was discharged for failure to sign the second reprimand. Mr. Garcia refused to sign the reprimands because he did not agree with the accuracy of the statements contained therein. Under these circumstances, the failure to sign a written reprimand is not misconduct justifying denial of benefits. See Mompoint v. Ward Stone College, Inc., 701 So.2d 1267 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Underhill v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., 610 So.2d 48, 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review dismissed, 624 So.2d 267 (Fla.1993). Mr. Garcia was discharged for failure to sign the reprimand, not for failure to carry out any work obligations. Accordingly, we reverse the order and remand with directions to afford Mr. Garcia benefits.

Reversed and remanded.

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

SHEVIN, Judge.

Manuel Garcia appeals an order denying him unemployment compensation benefits. We reverse. Mr. Garcia refused to sign a written reprimand; however, he served the imposed disciplinary suspension. Upon returning to work, he again refused to sign a reprimand that was issued for his failure to sign the first reprimand. He was discharged for failure to sign the second reprimand. Mr. Garcia refused to sign the reprimands because he did not agree with the accuracy of the statements contained therein. Under these circumstances, the failure to sign a written reprimand is not misconduct justifying denial of benefits. See Mompoint v. Ward Stone College, Inc., 701 So.2d 1267 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Underhill v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., 610 So.2d 48, 49 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992), review dismissed, 624 So.2d 267 (Fla.1993). Mr. Garcia was discharged for failure to sign the reprimand, not for failure to carry out any work obligations. Accordingly, we reverse the order and remand with directions to afford Mr. Garcia benefits.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

777 So. 2d 418, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12052, 1999 WL 701706, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garcia-v-roney-plaza-management-corp-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack