Navarrete v. FLORIDA UNEMP. APPEALS COM'N

726 So. 2d 833, 1999 WL 44205
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 3, 1999
Docket98-1650
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 726 So. 2d 833 (Navarrete v. FLORIDA UNEMP. APPEALS COM'N) 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
Navarrete v. FLORIDA UNEMP. APPEALS COM'N, 726 So. 2d 833, 1999 WL 44205 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

726 So.2d 833 (1999)

Juan F. NAVARRETE, Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, et al., Appellees.

No. 98-1650.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

February 3, 1999.

Juan F. Navarrete, in proper person.

*834 John D. Maher, Tallahassee, for appellee Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and JORGENSON and GERSTEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Juan Navarrete appeals from an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission that affirmed the denial of unemployment compensation benefits on the basis of misconduct connected with his work. For the reasons that follow, we reverse.

As this court has repeatedly stated, "Misconduct serious enough to warrant an employee's dismissal is not necessarily serious enough to warrant the forfeiture of compensation benefits." Benitez v. Girlfriday, Inc., 609 So.2d 665, 666 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); see also Baptiste v. Waste Management, Inc., 701 So.2d 386 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Webb v. Douglas N. Rice, C.P.A., 693 So.2d 1109 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Miller v. Barnett Bank of Broward County, 650 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).

Moreover, the mere exercise of poor judgment does not amount to misconduct sufficient to support the denial of unemployment compensation benefits. See Miller, 650 So.2d at 1090; see also Kelley v. Pueblo Wholesale Co., 627 So.2d 534 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).

The record in this case establishes that although the claimant may not have been a stellar employee, and that he did exercise poor judgment believing that he was acting in his employer's best interests, his actions did not amount to misconduct that disqualifies him from receiving benefits.

Reversed and remanded with directions to grant claimant unemployment compensation benefits.

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

Related

Flint v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission
79 So. 3d 115 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
Godoy v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission
43 So. 3d 80 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Amador v. Norcross Teleservices, Inc.
847 So. 2d 1129 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Gonzalez v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission
752 So. 2d 726 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Garcia v. Viking Life-Saving Equipment America, Inc.
728 So. 2d 295 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Fenelus v. Publix Super Markets, Inc.
727 So. 2d 274 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
726 So. 2d 833, 1999 WL 44205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/navarrete-v-florida-unemp-appeals-comn-fladistctapp-1999.