Quintana v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission

29 So. 3d 446, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 2923, 2010 WL 785913
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 10, 2010·No. 3D09-1444·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

SHEPHERD, J.

On October 24, 2008, a notice of determination, holding Norma Quintana was disqualified from receiving benefits and was overpaid in excess of seven hundred dollars, was mailed to the claimant with instructions for taldng a timely appeal from agency action. Since the appeal was not filed until January 12, 2009, well beyond the twenty-day statutory time limit, it was dismissed by the appeals referee. The Unemployment Appeals Commission affirmed. As nothing in the record supports a finding that the claimant’s notice was not provided to her in a timely manner, and Florida law does not permit good cause exceptions to the dismissal rule, we are bound to affirm the order of the Appeals Commission below. See Robinson v. Sun Bank & Trust Co., 685 So.2d 1325 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Riegler v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 633 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Leon v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 476 So.2d 761 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

Affirmed.

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

Quintana v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 29 So. 3d 446, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 2923, 2010 WL 785913 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

29 So. 3d 446 (Quintana v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Perez v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission
116 So. 3d 567 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
Rostran v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission
83 So. 3d 844 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)
Green v. Unemployment Appeals Commission
34 So. 3d 145 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)