08-2291 CYNTHIA A. CHAPMAN, v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION

State: Florida

Court: Florida First District Court

Docket No: 08-2291

Case Date: 07/13/2009

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CYNTHIA A. CHAPMAN, Appellant, v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, Appellee. _____________________________/ Opinion filed July 13, 2009.

CASE NO. 1D08-2291

An appeal from an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission. Cynthia A. Chapman, pro se, for Appellant. John D. Maher, Deputy General Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

BROWNING, J. Cynthia A. Chapman appeals a final order issued by Appellee, Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, affirming the appeals referee's

determination that Chapman was not eligible for unemployment compensation

benefits because she was not "able to work and available for work" within the meaning of the pertinent statutes and rule. Chapman, who was unrepresented by counsel in the administrative proceedings and is pro se in this Court, contends that she was wrongfully denied unemployment benefits without a satisfactory explanation. Because some of the referee's factual grounds for finding Chapman ineligible for benefits are not supported by competent substantial evidence and we cannot discern from the order whether the referee would have drawn the same conclusions based on the fact-supported findings, we reverse the final order and remand for clarification. Chapman filed a claim for unemployment benefits effective December 9, 2007. The Agency for Workforce Innovation (AWI) mailed notices of

determination to Chapman on January 8, 2008, stating that she was ineligible for unemployment benefits pursuant to chapter 443, Florida Statutes (2007), because she was able to work and available for work. The notices include the following explanation: The claimant is not available for work because of attending school during the customary work hours of the claimant's occupation. Since the claimant's school hours substantially restrict the claimant's employability, the claimant lacks a genuine attachment to the labor market.

2

The claimant's work search record indicated an inadequate search for work. The claimant was not trying to become re-employed at the earliest possible time as required by law. Chapman appealed that decision, and a notice was filed setting a telephonic hearing on February 19, 2008, before an appeals referee. The sole issue for adjudication was whether Chapman was able to work and available for work pursuant to the applicable statutes and rule. See

Download 08-2291 CYNTHIA A. CHAPMAN, v. FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION.pdf