Mr. Santiago J. Padilla

Florida Bar; Georgia Bar; American Immigration Lawyers Association; Attorneys' Title Insurance Fund; American Land Title Association.

Hernandez v. American General Finance, 39 So.3d 476 (3rd DCA, Fla. App., 2010) -- The issue before the Court was whether a single incident of wrongdoing by the claimant, which led the employer to terminate her job of 14 years, rises to the level of misconduct under the statute. The Court held that it was an isolated incident and a result of poor judgment and reversed the Unemployment Commission's decision to deny unemployment benefits.

Flint v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 79 So.3d 115 (3rd DCA, Fla. App., 2012) -- The Court held that although the claimant's action was in violation of a stated company policy and may have justified her discharge from employment, "such conduct does not necessarily preclude entitlement to unemployment benefits."

940 Lincoln Rd. Enterprises v. Hernandez, 67 So.3d 1192 (3rd DCA, Fla. App., 2011) --The claimant quit her job because she was sexually harassed by employer's owner. She repeatedly asked the owner to stop this conduct, and complained to her immediate supervisor, all to no avail. The claimant remained on the job because she had a small child and needed the income. However, when the situation got worse, she could no longer tolerate the owner's conduct and she finally quit. On these facts, the Appeals Referee denied unemployment benefits stating that it was not reasonable for the claimant to have stayed on the job and not have called the police, but on appeal, the Florida Unemployment Commission and the District Court of Appeals both held that "[t]here is no evidence to support the referee's conclusion that victims of sexual harassment frequently go to the police to complain about a hostile work environment or seek psychological or medical treatment. Additionally, sexual harassment can continue for several years before the victim makes public her complaint... . Considering a job is usually a person's economic lifeline, the claimant's failure to contact outside authorities regarding her complaint cannot be called unreasonable or inherently improbable."

Yes