MARIO E. VAZQUEZ
v.
B & R SUPERMARKET INC., ET AL.
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.
Where a claimant does not challenge the sufficiency of the referee's findings but only offers a different version of the facts, there is no legal error.
[1] In reemployment assistance appeals, a claimant who offers only an alternative version of facts without challenging the sufficiency of the referee's findings does not pres…
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“[W]here a claimant does not challenge the sufficiency of the [referee's] findings, but only offers a different version of the facts, there is no legal error.”
Court's citation to Ryals v. State, Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 722 So. 2d 845, 846 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
Mario E. Vazquez appealed a decision by the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission regarding his employment dispute with B & R Supermarket Inc.…
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.
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed June 19, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D24-0098 Lower Tribunal Nos. 23-01722, 23-01723, 23-01724 ________________
Mario E. Vazquez, Appellant,
vs.
B & R Supermarket Inc., et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the State of Florida, Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.
Mario E. Vazquez, in proper person.
Katie E. Sabo, Appellate Counsel (Tallahassee), for appellee Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.
Before EMAS, SCALES, and LINDSEY, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2
Affirmed. See Ryals v. State, Unemployment Appeals Comm’n, 722 So. 2d 845, 846 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (“[W]here a claimant does not challenge the sufficiency of the [referee’s] findings, but only offers a different version of the facts, there is no legal error.”).