BERTA THEISS, APPELLANT,
v.
UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION AND SAND PIPER BEACH CLUB, 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.
Appellant's unemployment benefits from prior full-time employment were not forfeited by quitting a subsequent part-time job; disqualification applies only to benefits reduced by part-time income.
An employee who quits part-time employment does not forfeit unemployment benefits earned from prior full-time employment, but is disqualified only to the extent benefits would be reduced by part-time income.
[1] An employee receiving unemployment benefits from prior full-time employment who subsequently quits part-time employment is disqualified only from benefits attributable to…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“To hold otherwise would discourage those receiving benefits from seeking and accepting part-time work.”
Court's rationale for protecting unemployment benefits from prior full-time employment when part-time work is abandoned.
Theiss was terminated from full-time employment and received unemployment compensation. She obtained part-time employment with Sand Piper Beach Club b…
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 Forfeiture Of Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Chief Judge.
Berta Theiss was terminated from full-time employment and began receiving unemployment compensation. She obtained part-time employment with the Sand Piper Beach Club, but worked only one day. The Unemployment Appeals Commission affirmed the decision of the appeals referee, and determined that Ms. Theiss was disqualified from further benefits because she quit her part-time employment without good cause. We reverse.
The appeals referee and the Commission treated Theiss’s claim as one governed by her part-time employment with Sand Piper Beach Club rather than one implicating her previous full-time employment. Consistent with the determination reached by this court in Neese v. Sizzler Family Steak House, 404 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), rev. denied, 412 So. 2d 471 (Fla.1982), Theiss did not forfeit her right to unemployment benefits stemming from her previous full-time employment. That entitlement was not affected by departure from her part-time job. To hold otherwise would discourage those receiving benefits from seeking and accepting part-time work. See Neese, at 372; Tierney v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 640 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Wright v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 512 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Theiss should have been disqualified from benefits only to the extent that those benefits would have been decreased by the income received from her part-time employment.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
RYDER and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Neese v. Sizzler Fam. Steak House & Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 404 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)
- The City OF Coral Gables v. Mayol, 512 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Tierney v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 640 So. 2d 154 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)