January 26, 2011
Should a litigant be barred from having her claim for unemployment benefits be heard because she confused time zones and called in for a hearing one hour too late? Today, a split panel of the Indiana Court of Appeals said, "Yes," in
S.S. v. Review Bd. of the Indiana Dept. of Workforce Dev., 941 N.E.2d 550 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), Case No. 93A02-1006-EX-738.
less..
In this case, a woman was unemployed and their was a dispute regarding whether it was for just cause. She was mailed a notice of hearing, which stated that her appeal would be dismissed if she failed to participate in the hearing and that she could appear by phone at 9:15 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. The woman "mixed up" the Eastern and Central time zones and was not home for the ALJ's phone call at the appointed time. Instead, at that time she was attending a food stamp hearing inside a federal building that did not permit use of cell phones. Her administrative appeal was dismissed. The woman requested reinstatement of her appeal, but that request was also denied.
On appeal, the Court held that the woman had an opportunity to be heard, because the notice specified the time of the hearing and warned the woman to verify which time zone she was in. It then affirmed the Review Board's finding that the woman's conflicting appointment and her confusion of the time zones failed to establish good cause for missing the hearing.
The Review Board's finding that S.S. did not show good cause for reinstatement of her appeal is a finding of ultimate fact, which this court reviews only for reasonableness, not de novo. The only facts S.S. points to as establishing good cause are her being stressed, confusing the Eastern and Central time zones, and thus missing the scheduled hearing unintentionally. ... [T]hese facts
taken as true do not establish a denial of S.S.'s reasonable opportunity to participate in the hearing. ... [B]ecause S.S. does not point to any circumstance outside her control which caused her to miss the telephonic hearing, we conclude the Review Board reasonably found she failed to show good cause for reinstating her appeal.
The dissent disagreed, finding that she should have been allowed to have her appeal from the denial of unemployment benefits heard.
Plausible arguments about due process aside, and looking at the total picture, we have before us the situation of a stressed-out, financially strapped, unemployed woman who made the very common mistake of confusing the time for her hearing to be an hour later rather than an hour earlier than the stated time given the time zone she was in, a mistake made every day by those who must negotiate the two time zones existing among the various counties of Indiana. She was in a federal building, her cell phone off as required, in a hearing to determine her continued eligibility for food stamps. She has copiously compiled the record of what has transpired in her case. While her appeal may or may not have merit, the only relief she seeks is to have her appeal from the denial of unemployment benefits heard.
The decision is unclear whether its determination of whether there was sufficient evidence justifying the Review Board's determination of "good cause" will affect the conduct necessary to establish cause in judicial proceedings. Litigants in highly contentious matters may use this case as justification for not agreeing to various deadlines. I'm not sure that this would be a good development for the profession.
Lessons:
- A person appealing a denial of unemployment benefits only as good cause for not attending a hearing if circumstances beyond her control prevent her attendance.
Trackback Address :: http://www.indianalawupdate.com/trackback/128
