From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Livingston v. Unemployment Appeals

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 30, 1993
620 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

No. 92-1521.

June 30, 1993.

Appeal from the Unemployment Appeals Commission.

L. Anton Rebalko, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

John D. Maher, Tallahassee, for Appellee-Unemployment Appeals Com'n.


The issue presented here is the same as that in Robinson v. Morrison, Inc., 501 So.2d 1323 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), and Vayvoski v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 443 So.2d 145 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), namely, whether the appellee commission should hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the appellant claimant received procedural due process. We reach the same conclusion as the above cases and reverse and remand with direction to hold such hearing.

Upon remand, should it be determined that appellant did not receive the appeals referee's decision in time to seek review, the claimant appellant is to be afforded such opportunity as directed in Robinson v. Unemployment Appeals Commission, 526 So.2d 198 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).

GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and HERSEY and STONE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Livingston v. Unemployment Appeals

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 30, 1993
620 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

Livingston v. Unemployment Appeals

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES I. LIVINGSTON, APPELLANT, v. UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION AND…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jun 30, 1993

Citations

620 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Leichering v. Unemploy. App. Comm

007 do not permit any "good cause" exceptions to the dismissal rule. The Commission, however, acknowledges…

Landrum v. James Rummer Timber Harvesting, Inc.

In order to ensure that Landrum received procedural due process, we remand for an evidentiary hearing.…