Skip to main content

Manning v. STATE OF UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION

Fla. Dist. Ct. App.June 13, 2001No. 4D00-1810Cited 6 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Per Curiam
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The appellate court reversed the unemployment appeals referee's decision denying benefits and remanded the case for reconsideration of whether the reduction in work hours was substantial enough to constitute good cause for termination.

What This Ruling Means

Based on the limited information provided, I cannot create a meaningful summary of the Manning v. State of Unemployment Appeals Commission case. The excerpt contains no details about: - What employment dispute occurred - What legal issues were involved - How the court ruled - The reasoning behind the decision To write a helpful summary for workers, I would need the actual court decision text that explains: - The facts of the case (what happened to the worker) - The legal question the court addressed - The court's ruling and reasoning - Any important legal principles established Without these essential details from the court ruling, any summary would be speculation rather than factual reporting. If you can provide the actual court decision text or a more detailed case summary, I'd be happy to explain it in plain English for workers. For now, I can only note that this appears to be a case involving unemployment benefits appeals, which typically concern disputes over whether a worker qualifies for unemployment compensation after losing their job.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.