From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Adams v. Burdines, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 9, 1992
600 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

No. 91-2848.

June 9, 1992.

Appeal from the Unemployment Appeals Commission.

Richard Lee Ruben, Miami, for appellant.

John D. Maher, Tallahassee, for appellees.

Before BASKIN, FERGUSON and JORGENSON, JJ.


We reverse the order of the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission denying appellant unemployment compensation benefits. We find that appellant's conduct did not rise to the level of "wilful or wanton disregard of an employer's interests as is found in deliberate violations or disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect. . . ." Fredericks v. Florida Dept. of Commerce, 323 So.2d 286, 288 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975) (emphasis added); § 443.036(26), Fla. Stat. (1989). See Smith v. Krugman-Kadi, 547 So.2d 677 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989), review denied, 558 So.2d 20 (Fla. 1990). Moreover, a single act of negligence does not support a finding that the employee engaged in misconduct. Johnson v. Florida Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 513 So.2d 1098, 1099 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

Adams v. Burdines, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 9, 1992
600 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

Adams v. Burdines, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL ADAMS, APPELLANT, v. BURDINES, INC., AND FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 9, 1992

Citations

600 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Citing Cases

Tanav v. DHL

As a matter of law, however, these actions do not amount to "misconduct" under section 443.036(26), Florida…

King v. Walgreen Co.

Contrary to the conclusion reached below, we find that these actions — from which King did not benefit and…