JANET L. BACHELOR, APPELLANT,
v.
UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, 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.
Janet Bachelor appealed an Unemployment Appeals Commission decision affirming a referee's finding that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause attributable to the employer. The court affirmed, holding that Bachelor failed to demonstrate reversible error in the factual findings.
The court affirmed the Unemployment Appeals Commission's decision, holding that Bachelor failed to meet her burden of demonstrating reversible error in the referee's factual findings, which are presumptively correct.
[1] An employee's disagreement with an unemployment referee's factual findings, which are presumptively correct, does not constitute reversible error.
[2] An employee bears the burden of demonstrating reversible error when appealing an unemployment benefits decision based on factual findings.
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“The crux of this appeal is the appellant's disagreement with the factual findings of the referee, which are presumptively correct.”
Establishes that the referee's factual findings carry presumptive correctness and the appellant bears the burden of demonstrating reversible error.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBachelor was employed as a secret shopper coordinator/secretary from June 11, 1996 to July 8, 1996. During her employment, she objected to using 800 p…
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 Voluntary Quit cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
In this case, the appellant has challenged an affirmance by the Unemployment Appeals Commission of a finding by the referee that Janet Bachelor voluntarily left her employment without good cause attributable to the employer. Her appeal is based upon a disagreement with the factual findings of the referee, which were as follows:
The claimant was employed as a secret shopper coordinator/secretary from June 11, 1996, until July 8, 1996. The claimant became upset because she was using 800 phone numbers downloaded from the Internet to locate secret shoppers. The claimant felt that this was a misuse of the numbers. The employer uses simple methods to locate the secret shoppers. The claimant was told at the time of hire that she would have a CD ROM with National Telephone Directories to find the secret shoppers. On several occasions, the claimant was asked to drop the mail off on her way home. The claimant informed the employer that this was out of the way and the employer said that someone else would take care of it. The claimant was asked to drop reports off that were within one or two blocks of the employer’s location. The claimant said that she wanted mileage to use her personal vehicle. On July 8,1996, the claimant made a suggestion that , the shoppers should be reimbursed more quickly because they were complaining. The supervisor told the claimant that he would ask when he wanted her input. The claimant wanted an employee handbook. The employer has handbooks for other offices that are part of a different corporation; however, the employer did not have an employee handbook for this company. On July 2, 1996, the supervisor informed the claimant that the attorney had recommended that he not give a handbook from the other company to the claimant. On July 8,1996, the claimant quit.
The crux of this appeal is the appellant’s disagreement with the factual findings of the referee, which are presumptively correct. She has failed in her burden of demonstrating reversible error. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 877 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979); Wolfson v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 649 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).
AFFIRMED.
W. SHARP and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Wolfson v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 649 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Quinton Collier v. State, 649 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)