RIETTER V. UAC

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JANUARY TERM A.D., 2004 ** URSULA RIETTER, ** Appellant, ** vs. CASE NO. 3D03-1810 ** FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION and CHARLES ORVIETTO, ** Appellees. LOWER TRIBUNAL CASE NO. 03-4513 ** Opinion filed June 30, 2004. An appeal from the Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission. Ursula Rietter, in proper person. John D. Maher (Tallahassee), Unemployment Appeals Commission. for appellee Florida Before LEVY, FLETCHER, and WELLS, JJ. PER CURIAM. Ursula Unemployment Rietter Appeals appeals from Commission a final affirming order the of the unemployment compensation appeals referee s determination that Rietter was ineligible for benefits due to misconduct connected with her work. We affirm. The standard of review of an administrative agency's adjudicative findings is whether those findings are supported by substantial competent Unemployment Appeals 2004). Our review record Comm'n, of the evidence. 864 So. record 2d See 1290 reveals Gfrorer (Fla. that v. 5th DCA there is substantial competent evidence supporting the referee s finding that Rietter was dismissed for misconduct connected with her work and is thus ineligible to receive unemployment compensation benefits. Rietter also contends that she was not given an opportunity at the hearing to offer her version of why she was dismissed from her job. However, the record shows that the appeals referee advised Rietter that she was entitled to ask questions and make statements on her own behalf. She was asked if she understood the hearing procedures to which question responded in the affirmative. Rietter The record shows that the appeals referee gave Rietter the opportunity to ask questions after the allegations of misconduct were presented; to offer additional testimony of her own; and to make a closing statement. We therefore affirm the final order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission. 2

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.