VERNALL HAMMETT, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION AND SALVATION ARMY, APPELLEES
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.
The court held that the Appeals Commission's order affirming the denial of unemployment benefits was not supported by competent substantial evidence in the record.
[1] An appellate court must reverse a commission's decision to affirm a referee's findings where competent substantial evidence does not support the findings.
[2] A claimant is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation if the employer is owned and operated primarily for religious purposes and is operated, supervised, co…
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 intelligenceAn employee filed for unemployment benefits after losing his job. The agency determined his employer, the Salvation Army, was a religious institution …
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 Unemployment Compensation Benefits cases and more on FLexlaw
Corrected Opinion1
Vernall Hammett (“Hammett”) appeals a final order of the Florida Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission (“Appeals Commission”),2 affirming a decision of an Appeals Commission referee which disqualified Hammett from receiving unemployment compensation on the basis that his employer, the Salvation Army, was owned and operated primarily for religious purposes and was operated, supervised, controlled, or principally supported by a church.3
Hammett worked as a sorter and then as a general manager at a thrift store operated by the Salvation Army. Hammett lost his job in 2009 and filed an unemployment claim in the middle of 2010. Shortly thereafter he received a Determination Notice from the Agency for Workforce Innovation4 notifying him that “the wages earned with the [Salvation Army] are not eligible for unemployment compensation tax. The employer’s primary function is a church or religious institution and these wages are not subject to unemployment taxation as stated by Florida law.”5
Hammett appealed this decision and a hearing was held before the Appeals Commission referee. Hammett was the only witness to testify at the hearing. No representative of the Salvation Army was present at or participated in the hearing. The referee asked Hammett a series of questions regarding the Salvation Army’s religious affiliation and purposes. The referee ultimately denied benefits, concluding that the Salvation Army “is operated primarily for religious purposes” and “is operated by a religious institution.” The Appeals Commission affirmed the decision, and Hammett timely appealed.
Having reviewed the meager record, including Hammett’s testimony, it is clear that there is no competent substantial evidence to support the referee’s determination and the Appeals Commission’s final order affirming same.6 With regard to findings of fact, “[a]n appellate court must reverse the Commission’s decision to affirm the referee’s findings where compe*308tent substantial evidence does not support the findings.” Garcia v. Wolf in the Woods, Inc., 37 So.3d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).
We reverse the Appeals Commission’s order and remand for an award of unemployment compensation benefits to Hammett.7
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- HIS Kids Daycare v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 904 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
- Garcia v. Wolf IN the Woods, Inc., 37 So. 3d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)