114 So. 3d 407
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2013Background
- Hernandez was discharged from employment and denied unemployment benefits by the Commission.
- The referee upheld the denial of benefits finding misconduct under Fla. Stat. § 443.036(30).
- Hernandez challenged the Commission’s decision on appeal to the Florida district court.
- The court reviews misconduct determinations de novo as a legal question, with fact findings reviewed for substantial evidence.
- The court concluded Hernandez’s conduct did not meet the statutory definition of misconduct as the incidents were isolated and lacked deliberate disregard.
- The decision reverses and remands to award benefits consistent with § 443.036(30).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hernandez’s conduct qualifies as misconduct under § 443.036(30). | Hernandez argues his incidents show no deliberate disregard. | The Commission asserts the conduct shows discharge for misconduct. | No; conduct is not misconduct under the statute. |
| Whether the incidents constitute deliberate violation or disregard of standard behavior. | Incidents were isolated poor judgment and inattention. | Disregard amounts to culpability and wrongful intent. | Not proven; no deliberate violation or culpability shown. |
| What is the proper standard of review for misconduct determinations? | Fla. court should defer to referee findings if supported by evidence. | Legal question of misconduct reviewed de novo by the court. | Misconduct is reviewed de novo as a matter of law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hialeah Hous. Auth. v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 16 So.3d 216 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (supports standard of review for factual findings)
- Saunders v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 888 So.2d 69 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (conduct misconduct question reviewed de novo)
- Doyle v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 635 So.2d 1028 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (preponderance of the evidence standard for misconduct)
- Morales v. Fla. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Comm’n, 106 So.3d 81 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (definition of misconduct under § 443.036(30))
- Miller v. Barnett Bank of Broward Cnty., 650 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (isolated negligence generally not misconduct)
- Spaulding v. Fla. Indus. Comm’n, 154 So.2d 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963) (inadvertent errors not misconduct)
- Barnes v. Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 717 So.2d 120 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (termination for cause not necessarily unemployment-disqualifying)