I was terminated as an employee by a publicly traded company for a reason that has been proven
invalid. Although I live in Florida, an employment At-Will state, my termination was for what they stated was cause. I was terminated because the company stated
that "we decided to terminate him for not being forthright on his application and having travel restrictions."
In my past, I was charged with committing a crime where the final resolution was that adjudication of guilt was withheld. On my employment application this company, the question asked "Have you ever been convicted of a felony?" I stated "No" because adjudication of guilt is not a conviction.
Based on the company's interpretation of the law, they considered this a conviction and terminated me for "not being forthright on his application.".
In my efforts to obtain unemployment benefits, this company stated that I was fired for cause and denied me these benefits and thus was not eligible for
unemployment. I disagreed and asked for an appeal from the State of Florida's Department of Unemployment Compensation. I requested the State of Florida provide a legal ruling on my case. This ruling was to determine whether or not the company had the right to deny my benefits based on their interpretation of the law and whether or not a withheld adjudication of guilt is considered a conviction.
The following statement was their response.
"The record reflects the claimant was discharged after the employer concluded the claimant had falsified his job application. The application asked the claimant whether he had ever been "convicted" of a crime. The claimant answered no to the question because, although he had been charged with the crime of grand larceny, adjudication of guilt was withheld. The referee reasoned that, because the claimant had pled guilty to the charges, he falsified the application.
Contrary to the referee's reasoning, the record is devoid of evidence the claimant deliberately answered the application question incorrectly. Since adjudication of guilt was withheld, the claimant has not been formally
"convicted" of the crime at the time he responded to the question on the application. While the employer could have framed its question in such a way as to include the disposition of the claimant's criminal charges, the question as written does not. Under the circumstances, the claimant's negative response to the question was not inappropriate and, therefore, his discharge was not for misconduct within the meaning of the unemployment compensation law."
Is this considered wrongful termination? Would I have a case against this company?

