From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Briceno v. Precision Delivery System

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 8, 2000
752 So. 2d 131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Opinion

No. 3D99-2341.

Opinion filed March 8, 2000.

An appeal from the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission. Juan Briceno, in proper person, L.T. No. 99-3970.

John D. Maher (Tallahassee), for appellee Commission.

Before COPE, SHEVIN and SORONDO, JJ.


Juan Briceno appeals the denial of unemployment compensation benefits. In the present case conflicting testimony was offered by the parties. It was the responsibility of the referee to resolve the conflicts, which he did in this case in favor of the employer. See Wallace v. Zahn Dental Co., Inc., 618 So.2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). This court is not allowed to overturn the referee's factual findings, as long as there was competent, substantial evidence at the hearing which supports the findings. See Gonzalez v. Master Flowers, Inc., 605 So.2d 180 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992). As we see no legal basis on which to disturb the referee's findings, the order is affirmed.


Summaries of

Briceno v. Precision Delivery System

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Mar 8, 2000
752 So. 2d 131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)
Case details for

Briceno v. Precision Delivery System

Case Details

Full title:JUAN BRICENO, Appellant, vs. PRECISION DELIVERY SYSTEM, INC., and FLORIDA…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Mar 8, 2000

Citations

752 So. 2d 131 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Wells v. Florida Unemp. Appeals Comm

A referee's finding of misconduct cannot be disturbed if it is supported by competent and substantial…

Montanez v. Compass Group USA, Inc.

We conclude that the order is supported by the record. See Briceno v. Precision Delivery Sys., Inc., 752…