RONALD BRENNER, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE AND FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 2004-12-22
No. 3D03-3398
Before LEVY, GERSTEN, and GODERICH, JJ.
892 So. 2d 1129 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2004) Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases

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.

Synopsis

Ronald Brenner appealed a decision denying him unemployment compensation benefits after his termination as Regional Director for the Department of Banking and Finance. The Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission affirmed the denial, finding that Brenner's position as a non-tenured Senior Management Service position was statutorily excluded from unemployment insurance coverage under Florida law.


Holding

Brenner was ineligible for unemployment compensation because his position as Regional Director fell within the statutory exclusion for employees in non-tenured policymaking or advisory positions in the Senior Management Service under section 443.1216(4)(c)4, Florida Statutes, and therefore he had no insured wages for his base period.


Headnotes

[1] Positions in the Senior Management Service, designated by state law as major nontenured policymaking or advisory positions, are excluded from unemployment compensation be…

[2] An agency's interpretation of a statute it is charged with administering is entitled to great deference and will not be overturned unless clearly erroneous.

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

Key Quotes

“Section 443.1216(4)(c)4, Florida Statutes, provides that chapter 443 does not apply to services performed by employees- "[i]n the employ of a public employer if the service is performed by an individual in the exercise of duties ... [i]n a position that, under state law, is designated as a major nontenured policymaking or advisory position, including a position in the Senior Management service created under section 110.402 ...."”

Establishes the statutory basis for excluding Brenner's position from unemployment insurance coverage

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Brenner was employed as Regional Director for the Department of Banking and Finance's South Florida region from August 1, 1999 until June 30, 2003, wh…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Ronald Brenner (“Brenner”) appeals from a final order of the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission (“the Commission”). We affirm the Commission’s Order, finding that Section 443.1216(4)(c) 4, Florida Statutes excludes Brenner’s position from unemployment compensation benefits.

Brenner was let go from his position as Regional Director for the Department of Finance and Banking for the South Florida region. Following his termination, Brenner applied for unemployment compensation and was denied benefits on the ground that he was ineligible to receive unemployment benefits because he did not have wages for insured work during his base period. Brenner appealed the denial of benefits, and was the only party and witness who testified at the Hearing; the Department of Banking and Finance did not contest the appeal.

The Appeals Referee concluded, and the Commission later agreed, that Brenner was employed in a non-tenured, Senior Management Service position, which was not covered employment under the applicable unemployment benefits statutes and, thus, he was not entitled to wage credits. The Referee found that Brenner served the Department from August 1, 1999 until June 30, 2003, when he was separated from his employment under non-disqualifying conditions. Brenner appealed the Referee’s decision to the Commission. The Commission affirmed the Referee’s decision, holding that Brenner was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. Brenner now appeals the Commission’s final order. Brenner’s position as Regional Director is statutorily governed by section 110.402, Florida Statutes, which provides:

The Senior Management Service is created as a separate system of personnel administration for positions in the executive branch the duties and responsibilities of which are primarily and essentially policymaking or managerial in nature.

§ 110.402, Fla. Stat.(2003).

Section 443.091(1)®, Florida Statutes provides that an unemployed individual is eligible to receive benefits if the Agency finds that the individual “has been paid wages for insured work equal to 1.5 times her or his high quarter wages during her or his base period.” § 443.091(l)(f), Fla. Stat. (2003). Section 443.036(27), Florida Statutes, defines “insured work” as “employment for employers.” § 443.036(27), Fla. Stat. (2003). Additionally, section 443.036(21), Florida Statutes, defines “employment” as “a service subject to this chapter under section '443.1216 which is performed by an employee for the person employing him or her.” § 443.036(21), Fla. Stat. (2003). Section 443.1216(4)(c)4, Florida Statutes, provides that chapter 443 does not apply to services performed by employees- “[i]n the employ of a public employer if the service is performed by an individual in the exercise of duties ... [i]n a position that, under state law, is designated as a major nontenured policymaking or advisory position, including a position in the Senior Management service created under section 110.402 ....” § 443.1216(4)(c)4, Fla. Stat. (2003). Thus, Brenner’s employment was excluded from unemployment benefit coverage pursuant to section 443.1216(4)(c)4, Florida Statutes.

In Gray v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 541 So. 2d 1319, 1320 (Fla. 1st DCA, 1989), the Court found that the “Regional Director with the Department of Corrections” was a non-tenured senior management service position that was ex.empt from coverage under chapter 443, Florida Statutes. Id. at 1320.

Traditionally, appellate courts give great deference to an administrative agency’s interpretation of its statutes. “We defer to the Commission’s interpretation. The rule is clear that an agency’s interpretation of a statute, with which it is legislatively charged with administering, shall be accorded great weight and should not be overturned ‘unless clearly erroneous.’ ” Cargill, Inc. v. Hill, 503 So. 2d 1340 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)(emphasis added); See also Dep’t of Ins. v. Southeast Volusia Hosp. Dist., 438 So. 2d 815, 820 (Fla.1983). It cannot be said-that the Commission erroneously interpreted sections 110.402 and 443.1216, Florida Statutes (2003). Accordingly, we affirm the Order of the Commission that denied the claimant his unemployment-benefits.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Eris Arza v. Fla. Elections Comm'n, 907 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
    …2d 512, 515 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). It is axiomatic that an agency’s interpretation of a statute that it is charged with administering is to be given great weight and should not be overturned unless clearly erroneous. Brenner v. Dept. of Banking & Fin., 892 So. 2d 1129, 1130 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). “However, a court need not defer to an agency’s construction or application of a statute if special agency expertise is not required or if the agency’s interpretation conflicts with the plain and ordinary meaning of the sta…
  • …An administrative agency’s interpretation of a statute which it is legislatively charged with administering is entitled to great weight and should not be overturned unless clearly erroneous. See, e.g., Brenner v. Department of Banking and Finance, 892 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004); Cone v. State, Dept. of Health, 886 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). We find nothing in the Agency’s rule which conflicts with its legislative mandate. We, therefore, affirm the trial court’s denial of the motion to dismiss findi…
  • Brenner v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 929 So. 2d 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
    …eriod of calendar year 2002. The Commission determined that Claimant was not entitled to benefits on account of the statutory exclusion. The Claimant appealed and this court upheld the Commission’s finding. See Brenner v. Dept. of Banking & Finance, 892 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3rd DCA 2004). Upon receiving this ruling, the Claimant was still unemployed. He filed a new claim on June 29, 2004 with a base period of calendar year 2003. The appeals referee again ruled that because the Claimant held a Senior Management S…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw