Rosemarin v. State Unemployment Appeals Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Rosemarin v. State Unemployment Appeals Commission

712 So. 2d 1188, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7187, 1998 WL 314683

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 17, 1998

DocketNos. 97-1902, 97-3264

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 712 So. 2d 1188 (Rosemarin v. State 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

Rosemarin v. State Unemployment Appeals Commission, 712 So. 2d 1188, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7187, 1998 WL 314683 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the orders of the Unemployment Appeals Commission. Appellant ceased working for Syntex in November, 1994. From late 1994 until December 31, 1996, he received termination payments from Syntex of about $3,022.27 biweekly. From each check, Syntex deducted federal withholding and social security taxes and reported the payments as wages paid to the Division of Unemployment Compensation. In July, 1996, appellant began to receive a retirement pension from Syntex of $1,100.00 per month.

On December 2, 1996, appellant filed a claim for unemployment benefits as a result of his termination from a different [1189]*1189employer. The date of the claim created a “base period” of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. See § 443.036(5), Fla. Stat. (1997). During the base period, appellant received $72,536.40. from Syntex. These payments constituted “wages” within the meaning of section 443.036(33)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). The pension benefit from Syntex exceeded the weekly benefit amount to which appellant was entitled. He was therefore disqualified from receiving benefits pursuant to section 443.101(8)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). We construe the term “base period employer” in section 443.101(8)(a) to mean an employer that pays section 443.036(33) “wages” to an employee during the base period.

AFFIRMED.

GLICKSTEIN and GROSS, JJ., and GOLDENBERG, RENEE, Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the orders of the Unemployment Appeals Commission. Appellant ceased working for Syntex in November, 1994. From late 1994 until December 31, 1996, he received termination payments from Syntex of about $3,022.27 biweekly. From each check, Syntex deducted federal withholding and social security taxes and reported the payments as wages paid to the Division of Unemployment Compensation. In July, 1996, appellant began to receive a retirement pension from Syntex of $1,100.00 per month.

On December 2, 1996, appellant filed a claim for unemployment benefits as a result of his termination from a different [1189]*1189employer. The date of the claim created a “base period” of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996. See § 443.036(5), Fla. Stat. (1997). During the base period, appellant received $72,536.40. from Syntex. These payments constituted “wages” within the meaning of section 443.036(33)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). The pension benefit from Syntex exceeded the weekly benefit amount to which appellant was entitled. He was therefore disqualified from receiving benefits pursuant to section 443.101(8)(a), Florida Statutes (1997). We construe the term “base period employer” in section 443.101(8)(a) to mean an employer that pays section 443.036(33) “wages” to an employee during the base period.

AFFIRMED.

GLICKSTEIN and GROSS, JJ., and GOLDENBERG, RENEE, Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

712 So. 2d 1188, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 7187, 1998 WL 314683, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosemarin-v-state-unemployment-appeals-commission-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack