JOSEPH MORAN v. BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, et al.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-5093-06T35093-06T3

JOSEPH MORAN,

Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF

LABOR, and PARSIPPANY-TROY HILLS

BOARD OF EDUCATION,

Respondents.

___________________________________

 

Submitted June 11, 2008 - Decided

Before Judges Wefing and Collester.

On appeal from the Board of Review,

Department of Labor, No. 141,742.

Appellant filed a pro se brief.

Anne Milgram, Attorney General, attorney

for respondent Board of Review, Department

of Labor (Lewis A. Scheindlin, Assistant

Attorney General, of counsel; Alan C.

Stephens, Deputy Attorney General, on

the brief).

No brief was filed by respondent Parsippany-

Troy Hills Board of Education.

PER CURIAM

Petitioner Joseph Moran appeals from a Final Decision of the Board of Review upholding the denial of his application for unemployment compensation benefits. After reviewing the record in light of the contentions advanced on appeal, we affirm.

Moran was employed by the Parsippany-Troy Hills Board of Education as an assistant principal. In his third year of employment, he was told that his contract would not be renewed for the coming year. He was advised by his employer that if he submitted his resignation, his chances of securing future employment would be stronger. His union representative concurred in this advice, and he submitted his resignation, to be effective June 30, 2006.

He did not immediately file an application for unemployment benefits, believing that he would obtain a new position in just a short period of time and also believing that he was not eligible for these benefits. When his period of unemployment dragged on, and his funds were exhausted, he submitted an application for unemployment compensation benefits in November 2006.

His application was approved, and he received benefits thereafter until he secured a new position in January 2007. This appeal revolves around his attempt to receive the unemployment compensation benefits he would have received from July 2006 through November 2006 if he had timely filed an application.

N.J.A.C. 12:17-4.1(a) provides in pertinent part that "[t]he effective date of an initial claim for benefits is the Sunday of the week in which the claimant first reports to claims benefits." There is no authority for us to grant Moran a retroactive adjustment to the effective date of his initial claim for benefits. He was not misled as to the correct procedures or his entitlement by any action of the Division of Unemployment Compensation. We have, in such an instance, permitted such a retroactive adjustment. Meaney v. Board of Review, 151 N.J. Super. 295 (App. Div. 1977) (permitting an application to be predated when the late filing was due solely to misinformation supplied by Division personnel). In doing so, however, we noted that, "failure to file a timely claim does not justify pre-dating where the late filing is due to the claimant's neglect or oversight or misunderstanding." Id. at 299.

While we recognize the many distractions with which petitioner had to deal, in addition to his separation from his job, they do not permit us to grant him the relief he seeks. This is particularly so in light of the narrow scope of our review of a final agency decision such as this. Karins v. City of Atlantic City, 152 N.J. 532, 540 (1988). R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D).

The order under review is affirmed.

 

(continued)

(continued)

4

A-5093-06T3

June 25, 2008