MARK TETZLAFF, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, RESPONDENT
MARK TETZLAFF, PETITIONER,
FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, RESPONDENT
926 So. 2d 1267
Florida Supreme Court (2006)
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We initially accepted jurisdiction to review Tetzlaff v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 866 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), based on an apparent conflict with Dines v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, 730 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). Upon further consideration of the jurisdictional and merits briefs, we have determined that Tetzlajf and Dines are factually distinct so that the decisions are not in express and direct conflict pursuant to article V, section 3(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution. Accordingly, we have determined that jurisdiction was improvidently granted and this review is hereby dismissed.
It is so ordered.
PARIENTE, C. J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur. QUINCE, J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Dines v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 730 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Tetzlaff v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 866 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)