Narrative Opinion Summary
The order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission is reversed, reinstating the appeals referee's decision that the appellant is entitled to unemployment benefits. The referee determined that the appellant did not voluntarily leave his job without good cause. The Commission has the authority to modify or reverse a referee's decision only if the findings lack competent, substantial evidence. In this case, substantial evidence supports the referee's findings, particularly regarding the resolution of testimony conflicts in favor of the appellant. The case is reversed and remanded for further proceedings. Judges Polen, Klein, and Gross concur with this decision.
Legal Issues Addressed
Authority of Unemployment Appeals Commissionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The legal principle that the Commission can only modify or reverse a referee's decision if the findings lack competent, substantial evidence was applied in this case to determine that the Commission overstepped its authority.
Reasoning: The Commission has the authority to modify or reverse a referee's decision only if the findings lack competent, substantial evidence.
Entitlement to Unemployment Benefitssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellant was found entitled to unemployment benefits because the appeals referee's decision that the appellant did not voluntarily leave his job without good cause was supported by substantial evidence.
Reasoning: The referee determined that the appellant did not voluntarily leave his job without good cause.
Resolution of Testimony Conflictssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court upheld the referee's decision, noting that the substantial evidence supported the resolution of testimony conflicts in favor of the appellant.
Reasoning: In this case, substantial evidence supports the referee's findings, particularly regarding the resolution of testimony conflicts in favor of the appellant.