CLIFFORD H. PALMER vs REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION AND CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH, FLORIDA
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CLIFFORD H. PALMER, Appellant, v. REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION AND CITY OF DAYTONA BEACH, FLORIDA, Appellees. ________________________________/ Opinion filed June 30, 2021 Administrative Appeal from the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission. David W. Glasser, of Law Office of David W. Glasser, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Katie E. Sabo, of Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission, Tallahassee, for Appellee, Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission. Gary M. Glassman, of the City of Daytona Beach, Daytona Beach, for Appellee, City of Daytona Beach, Florida. Case No. 5D20-2038 PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Willick v. Unemplmt. App. Comm’n, 885 So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (“A claimant who leaves his or her employment voluntarily without good cause is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits.” (citing § 443.101(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2002))); Bd. of Cnty. Comm’rs, Citrus Cnty. v. Fla. Dep’t of Com., Div. of Emp. Sec., 370 So. 2d 1209, 1211 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (explaining that “[w]hen an employee, in the face of allegations of misconduct, chooses to leave his employment rather than exercise his right to have the allegations determined, such action supports a finding that the employee voluntarily left his job without good cause” and holding that “[t]he appeals referee is the factfinder in respect to unemployment compensation benefits, and where there is substantial, competent evidence to support his findings his decision must be upheld” (citing Dep’t of Com. v. Dietz, 349 So. 2d 1226, 1228 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977); Quick v. N. Cent. Fla. Cmty. Mental Health Ctr., 316 So. 2d 301, 302 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975))); Contreras v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Comm’n, 178 So. 3d 953, 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (recognizing that an appeals referee’s findings in respect to unemployment compensation benefits “are to be accorded a presumption of correctness” (quoting Szniatkiewicz v. Unemplmt. App. Comm’n, 864 So. 2d 498, 501 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004))). 2 LAMBERT, EISNAUGLE and HARRIS, JJ., concur. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
