Case Name: AT & T COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Appellant, v. Albertha C. JOHNSON, and Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-07-23
Citations: 582 So. 2d 177
Docket Number: No. 91-416
Parties: AT & T COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Appellant, v. Albertha C. JOHNSON, and Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, Appellees.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 582
Pages: 177–178

Head Matter:
AT & T COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Appellant, v. Albertha C. JOHNSON, and Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission, Appellees.
No. 91-416.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
July 23, 1991.
Muller, Mintz, Kornreich, Caldwell, Casey, Crosland & Bramnick, and Michael W. Casey, III, Miami, for appellant.
John D. Maher, Tallahassee, for appel-lees.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and FERGUSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
AT & T Communications, Inc., appeals an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission affirming the decision of the appeals referee. We affirm.
There is no evidence in the record to support appellant's allegation that the employee engaged in misconduct; accordingly, the appeals referee properly concluded that appellant did not meet its burden of proving misconduct. "The appeals referee is the fact finder in a hearing to determine eligibility for unemployment compensation benefits." Kan v. P.G. Cook Assoc., 566 So.2d 932, 933 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). The decision of the appeals referee is supported by competent substantial evidence, Kan; Hines v. Department of Labor & Employment Sec., 455 So.2d 1104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Sanchez v. Department of Labor & Employment Sec., State of Fla., Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 411 So.2d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), and was properly affirmed by the Commission. We therefore affirm the Commission's order.
Affirmed.