IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

                                                             FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

PROJECT HEALTH, INC.,                                        NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
                                                             FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
         Appellant,                                          DEPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

v.                                                           CASE NO. 1D01-2730, 1D01-4124, 1D01-
                                                                  4126, and 1D01-4129
FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT
APPEALS COMMISSION, et al,

         Appellees.

                                                        /


Opinion filed August 28, 2002.

An appeal from an order of the Unemployment Appeals Commission.

William P. Dillon, Esquire, McMorrow & Dillon, P.A., Naples, for Appellant.

John D. Maher, Attorney for Commission, Tallahassee, for Appellees.





PER CURIAM.

         This  is  an  appeal  by  Appellant  Project  Health,  Inc.,  the employer, from four

separate orders of Appellee Florida Unemployment Appeals Commission entered in

favor of employees Kenneth R. Anderson, M.D., Gail E. Bennett, P.A.-C., Carol A.

Colvin,  M.D., and Sandra W. Lamphier, M.D.  (the "Providers").  We reverse the

Commission's  rulings  because  they  are  not  supported  by competent, substantial

evidence.  

       The Providers sent a letter dated October 26, 2000 to Project Health indicating

they were resigning effective December 31, 2000 unless the CEO of Project Health was

terminated.  Project Health accepted the resignation letter and asked for written

clarification if their resignation was not intended.  The resignation letter was not

withdrawn  and  no  written  clarification  was  submitted.  The Providers' last date of

employment was December 31, 2000. 

       Although  the  Providers  had  been  negotiating  new  employment contracts with

Project  Health when the Providers sent their resignation letter, the record lacks any

evidence  showing  that  the  Providers'  demand  for  the CEO's termination was a

"counteroffer"  in  the new contract negotiations as ruled by the Commission.

Therefore,  according  to  the  express  language  of  their  resignation letter, the end of

Providers' employment arose because of Project Health's unwillingness to terminate

its CEO rather than Project Health's demand for new contractual terms as ruled by the

Commission.1




                                             2


      Accordingly, the Providers voluntarily left their employment without good cause

attributable to Project Health and are disqualified for benefits.  See § 443.101(1)(a),

Fla. Stat. (2000).  Therefore, we reverse the Commission's orders and remand with

instructions to substitute the Appeals Referees' decisions in Cases 01-4126 and 01-

4124, and to enter orders in favor of Appellant in Cases 01-2730 and 01-4129.

BARFIELD, MINER and POLSTON, JJ., concur.


_________________________________

       1For  example,  the  Appeals  Referee  in  01-2730,  affirmed  by  the  Commission,
erroneously  stated  that  the  Providers  "gave  notice  on  October  26,  2000,  that they
would be resigning effective December 31, 2000, if the employer continued to demand
they enter into the new employment agreement."  (Emphasis added).  The letter only
demands  the  termination  of  the  CEO  and  makes no mention of the employer's
continued demands for a new employment agreement.

                                          3