LaRocca v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

LaRocca v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

643 So. 2d 1199, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10112, 1994 WL 576113

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 21, 1994

DocketNo. 93-2838

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 643 So. 2d 1199 (LaRocca 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

LaRocca v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 643 So. 2d 1199, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10112, 1994 WL 576113 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Joseph W. LaRocca timely appeals an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission affirming the appeals referee’s decision to deny LaRoeca’s claim for unemployment compensation benefits. Based on the uncon-troverted evidence in this case, we conclude that, as a matter of law, LaRocca was discharged for an isolated act involving poor judgment rather than misconduct as defined by Chapter 443 of the Florida Statutes.¹ See Lewis v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 598 So.2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Pallas v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 578 So.2d 487 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Erber v. Federal Express Corp., 409 So.2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). See also Paul v. Jabil Circuit Co., 627 So.2d 545 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Nelson v. Burdines, Inc., 611 So.2d 1329 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Benitez v. Girlfriday, Inc., 609 So.2d 665 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Cf. Orange Bank v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 611 So.2d 107 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), rev. denied, 621 So.2d 1066 (Fla. 1993); Lake County Sheriffs Department v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 478 So.2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 463 So.2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Accordingly, we reverse and remand this cause for entry of an order granting La-Rocca’s claim for unemployment compensation benefits.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COBB, W. SHARP and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Joseph W. LaRocca timely appeals an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission affirming the appeals referee’s decision to deny LaRoeca’s claim for unemployment compensation benefits. Based on the uncon-troverted evidence in this case, we conclude that, as a matter of law, LaRocca was discharged for an isolated act involving poor judgment rather than misconduct as defined by Chapter 443 of the Florida Statutes.¹ See Lewis v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 598 So.2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); Pallas v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 578 So.2d 487 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Erber v. Federal Express Corp., 409 So.2d 522 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). See also Paul v. Jabil Circuit Co., 627 So.2d 545 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Nelson v. Burdines, Inc., 611 So.2d 1329 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Benitez v. Girlfriday, Inc., 609 So.2d 665 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). Cf. Orange Bank v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 611 So.2d 107 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), rev. denied, 621 So.2d 1066 (Fla. 1993); Lake County Sheriffs Department v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 478 So.2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 463 So.2d 465 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Accordingly, we reverse and remand this cause for entry of an order granting La-Rocca’s claim for unemployment compensation benefits.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

COBB, W. SHARP and DIAMANTIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

643 So. 2d 1199, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 10112, 1994 WL 576113, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larocca-v-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack