Case Name: Joseph M. WIPPEL, Appellant, v. REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION, Appellee.
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2018-12-18
Citations: 259 So. 3d 314
Docket Number: No. 1D17-4912
Parties: Joseph M. WIPPEL, Appellant,
v.
REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 259
Pages: 314–315

Head Matter:
Joseph M. WIPPEL, Appellant,
v.
REEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE APPEALS COMMISSION, Appellee.
No. 1D17-4912
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
December 18, 2018
Joseph M. Wippel, pro se, Appellant.
Norman Blessing, General Counsel, and Cristina Velez, Appellate Counsel, Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Wippel filed an appeal to the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission (RAAC) after he received two contradictory notifications concerning his application for reemployment assistance. RAAC dismissed the appeal as untimely, and Wippel now appeals that dismissal. RAAC concedes error, stating that it should not have dismissed the appeal if it was untimely due to overlapping agency orders. We accept this concession, and remand for a determination as to whether Wippel filed a belated appeal to RAAC due to confusion stemming from these orders. See Ellis v. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n , 73 So.3d 887, 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Osterhaus, Winokur, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.