Neagley v. Maine Unemployment Insurance Commission

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

STATE OF MAINE KENNEBEC, ss. SUPERIOR COURT CIVIL ACTION DOCKET NO. AP-05-36 WILLIAM S. NEAGLEY, Appellant DECISION ON APPEAL MAINE UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMM:ISSION, Respondent T h s matter comes before the court on the petition of William Neagley for review of final agency action pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80C. Both the appellant and the appellee made written submissions to the court outlining their arguments, and the matter was scheduled for oral argument on August 8, 2006. Due to h s present residence in Pennsylvania, the appellant did not appear for argument but requested that the court decide the matter on briefs. In October and November of 2004, Neagley was unemployed, but enrolled in an approved training program in Maine. In order to collect unemployment benefits, he was required to submit a claim form for each week he wished to claim benefits. He was required to submit the claim form within 14 days of the end of the week for whch he was seelung benefits; an extra seven days was allowed for good cause shown. Neagley takes the position that although he submitted the claim forms late for the period of October 23 to November 20, 2004, he should nevertheless be entitled to unemployment benefits for those weelks. Discussion It is clear as a matter of law that applicants for unemployment benefits must make timely application within the established period. The provisions of 26 M.R.S.A. § 1192(1)include the provision that eligibility to receive benefits depends upon malung a claim for such beinefits in accordance with the Commission's regulations. The Commission's regula~tions or rules establish the procedure that when filing an application by mail, the claim card must have been postmarked no later than 14 days from the end of the week being claimed. Or, stated differently, no claims are allowed if the claim card is filed beyond the 14-day period or an additional seven days if good cause is found. There is no factual dispute that the petitioner failed to file the claim forms w i h n the required period. 'The petitioner's explanation for this lateness appears to be that he had been late in sending cards in in the past without penalty, that he was in school under an approved program and "that it's no big deal" if the cards are not filed in a timely fashion. See Record at 28. The petitioner does not argue that he was unaware of the time limits. Also, the administrative hearing officer found no evidence that he was misled by the Bureau. See Record at 16. While the petitioner's delay in submitting the claim forms seems inadvertent, and based upon a good-faith belief that he was following necessary procedures, he did not follow the required procedures. Therefore, the petitioner's untimely filing of h s claim cards would not entitle h m to benefits for the weeks in question. The court finds that the Commission's decision was supported by substantial evidence of record, was not an error of law and was w i h n its discretion. For the reasons;stated, the entry will be: The Connmission's decision is AFFIRMED. Dated: s e p t e m b e r - 3 ,2006 I S. G r k Studstrup Justice, Superior Court Date Filed 5/15/05.- 1 Docket No. ber County AP05-16 - Action P e t i t i o n f o rReview J. STUDSTRUP MninP VS. WiJJJam S. y N Plaintiff's Attorney William S. Neagl=y, Pro Se 892 Veterans Way Elliottsburg, PA 17024 Defendant's Attorney Kelly L. Turner, AAG 6 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04333-0006 Date of Entry Petition for Review, filed. s/Neagley, Pro Se Respondent's Motion to Dismiss Appeal as Untimely, filed. slturner, AAG Respondent Maine Unemployment Insurance Commission's Withdrawal of Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Enlargment of Time to File Record, filed. s/Turne.r, AAG Proposed Order, filed. ORDER, STUDSTRUP , J Respond~~nt shall file the administrative recors on or before December 21, 2005. Copies mailed to Pltf. and atty. Received and filed by AAG Kelly Turner, for respondent, the ~dministrative Record. . Notice 'of briefing schedule mailed to atty and Pltf. ~etitio-ner's Brief, filed. slNeagley, Pro Se Brief of Respondent Maine Unemployment Insurance Commission, filed. s/Turner, AAG Oral arguments scheduled for 6/8/06 are cancelled. To be rescheduled. Copy of notice mailed to parties. Letter requesting case to be continued., filed. s/Neagley, Pro Se Hearing had, Studstrup, J. Case to be decided on the memos. DECISION ON APPEAL, Studstrup, 3. The Comn~ission's decision is AFFIRMED. Copies mailed to Pltf. and atty of record. Notice of removal of record mailed.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.