SHIRLEY ARNOLD, APPELLANT,
v.
BURGER QUEEN SYSTEMS, INC., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Shirley Arnold, a Black high school student, appealed an adverse ruling by the Florida Commission on Human Relations denying her discrimination complaint against Burger Queen Systems, Inc. The commission found she had failed to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination in her termination from part-time employment.
The Commission on Human Relations correctly determined that Arnold did not present a prima facie case of discrimination and that Burger Queen presented a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her employment, and the court affirmed because substantial competent evidence in the record supported these findings.
[1] An appellate court must affirm a commission's order when there is competent substantial evidence in the record supporting the commission's findings of fact.
[2] A plaintiff alleging racial discrimination in employment must establish a prima facie case.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Appellant was a black high school student in Arcadia, Florida, whose high school vocational instructor arranged for part-time employment at one of appellee's fast food operations.”
Establishes the basic facts regarding Arnold's status and employment arrangement
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceArnold, a Black high school student in Arcadia, Florida, was employed part-time at a Burger Queen franchise from late November 1979 until her discharg…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Unlawful Employment Practice cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Judge.
Appellant appeals the order of the Florida Commission on Human Relations that denied appellant’s petition which sought relief under chapter 760, Florida Statutes (1979), which petition alleged an unlawful employment practice of discrimination against appellant on the basis of her race.
Appellant was a black high school student in Arcadia, Florida, whose high school vocational instructor arranged for part-time employment at one of appellee’s fast food operations. She worked part-time after school from late November, 1979, to the date of her discharge on January 8, 1980. The stated basis for her discharge was unsatisfactory work performance in conjunction with appellee’s efforts to render profitable its business operations which ultimately were financial failures. Appellant alleged that she was terminated because she was told she was too slow and unable to handle the job. She further alleged she was. not given the same training opportunities that white employees were given and that she was also given fewer working hours and less desirable work assignments than white employees.
Appellant first filed a complaint of discrimination pursuant to chapter 760. As a result of the commission’s investigation, a determination was made finding reasonable cause to believe that discrimination had occurred. Efforts to conciliate pursuant to chapter 760 were unsuccessful and appellant filed her petition for relief from unlawful unemployment practices. The petition was referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings for formal hearing.
After hearing, the hearing officer entered his recommended order finding that appellant did not present a prima facie case of discrimination and that appellee presented a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for terminating her employment. A three-member panel of the Commission on Human Relations held public deliberations and, after hearing, adopted the hearing officer’s recommended order and denied appellant’s petition for relief with one member of the commission dissenting. Appellant has appealed from the commission’s order. This is an appeal which involves disputed issues of fact. The hearing officer and the commission resolved those disputes in favor of appellee and against appellant. There is competent substantial evidence in the record supporting the findings of the hearing officer and the commission and under our standard of review, we are required to affirm.
SCHEB, A.C.J., concurs.
SANDERLIN, J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Puckett OIL Co., Inc., 577 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…wer in the absence of any demonstration of prejudice to the petitioner, or without consideration of any evidence of reasons for not complying with the rule. See Arnold v. Burger Queen Sys., 8 F.A. L.R. 3606 (Fla. Comm’n Human Relations 1986), aff'd, 509 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Bates v. School Bd. of Alachua County, 10 F.A.L.R. 4647 (Fla. Comm’n Human Relations 1988). Similarly, in the case at bar, in that there was only a delay of four days in the filing of the response, and no showing was made that th…
-
Ratliff v. State, 666 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…d, it is incumbent on the plaintiff or petitioner — the party claiming racial discrimination — to establish a prima facie case. Failure to establish a prima facie case of race discrimination ends the inquiry. Arnold, v. Burger Queen [*1013] Systems, 509 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). "Establishment of the prima facie case in effect creates a presumption that the employer unlawfully discriminated against the employee.” Texas Dept, of Community Affairs v. Burdine, 450 U.S. 248, 254, 101 S.Ct. 1089, 1094, 67 L.E…
-
Joannie Greer v. Burger Queen Sys., Inc., 509 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…CAMPBELL, Judge. The facts of this case and the record on appeal are identical with the companion case of Arnold v. Burger Queen Systems, Inc., 509 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). As we did in that case, we affirm because there is competent substantial evidence in the record, to support the factual findings of the commission. SCHEB, A.C.J., concurs. SANDERLIN, J., dissents.…