Mahan v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mahan v. Unemployment Appeals Commission

935 So. 2d 1234, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 13442, 2006 WL 2347390

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 11, 2006

DocketNo. 5D06-154

StatusPublished

This text of 935 So. 2d 1234 (Mahan 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

Mahan v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 935 So. 2d 1234, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 13442, 2006 WL 2347390 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael S. Mahan appeals a final order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission affirming the decision of an unemployment compensation appeals referee determining that Mr. Mahan was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because he was discharged for misconduct connected with his work. We affirm.

We review the adjudicative findings arising from an unemployment compensation proceeding to determine if they are supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Miller v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 690 So.2d 752 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). We do not substitute our judgment for that of the agency with respect to the weight of the evidence on disputed facts. See Rosmond v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 651 So.2d 233, 234 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). The appeals referee heard and evaluated the testimony presented and believed the evidence presented by the employer. As credibility is a matter within the discretion of the finder of fact, and as the findings in this case are supported by [1235]*1235the requisite competent, substantial evidence, we find no basis to disturb the final order under review.

AFFIRMED.

PLEUS, C.J., ORFINGER and MONACO, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Michael S. Mahan appeals a final order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission affirming the decision of an unemployment compensation appeals referee determining that Mr. Mahan was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because he was discharged for misconduct connected with his work. We affirm.

We review the adjudicative findings arising from an unemployment compensation proceeding to determine if they are supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Miller v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 690 So.2d 752 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). We do not substitute our judgment for that of the agency with respect to the weight of the evidence on disputed facts. See Rosmond v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 651 So.2d 233, 234 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). The appeals referee heard and evaluated the testimony presented and believed the evidence presented by the employer. As credibility is a matter within the discretion of the finder of fact, and as the findings in this case are supported by [1235]*1235the requisite competent, substantial evidence, we find no basis to disturb the final order under review.

AFFIRMED.

PLEUS, C.J., ORFINGER and MONACO, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

935 So. 2d 1234, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 13442, 2006 WL 2347390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mahan-v-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack