Background
Noel H. Blenman sought reemployment assistance benefits after separating from his employment. A referee denied benefits after finding that Blenman had voluntarily left his employment rather than been discharged. The Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission affirmed, concluding that competent, substantial evidence supported the referee’s determination.
The referee’s decision turned on the weight assigned to sharply conflicting testimony. On appeal to the Third District, Blenman offered for the first time a series of text messages that purportedly contradicted aspects of the employer’s presentation.
The Court’s Holding
The Third District affirmed the Commission’s order. The court concluded that Blenman’s initial brief failed to identify reversible error under section 120.68(7), Florida Statutes (2025).
Because claims of error not raised in an appellant’s initial brief are deemed abandoned or waived, the court held that any asserted error was forfeited. The newly offered text messages did not alter that result.
Key Takeaways
- An appellant challenging a Florida administrative decision must identify reversible error in the initial brief.
- Arguments omitted from the initial brief are generally forfeited on appeal.
- Evidence presented for the first time on appeal does not cure a failure to preserve and brief a claim of error.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that appellate briefing requirements can be dispositive even when an administrative ruling rests on conflicting evidence. Parties seeking review of reemployment-benefit decisions must clearly identify the alleged statutory basis for reversal in their initial briefs.