Hansen v. DWS

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

Beckylynn Hansen,
Petitioner,

v.

Department of Workforce Services and Continental Airlines, Inc.,
Respondents.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20021055-CA
 

F I L E D
(May 15, 2003)
 

2003 UT App 147

-----

Original Proceeding in this Court

Attorneys: Beckylynn Hansen, West Jordan, Petitioner Pro Se

Lorin R. Blauer, Salt Lake City, for Respondents

-----

Before Judges Jackson, Billings, and Bench.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner Beckylynn Hansen seeks judicial review of the decision of the Workforce Appeals Board (Board) concluding that her appeal of the department decision denying her unemployment benefits was untimely and that she had not demonstrated good cause for the late filing. The case is before the court on a sua sponte motion for summary affirmance. Hansen did not file a response.

The Workforce Appeals Board adopted a finding of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) that Hansen did not actually receive the May 24, 2002 decision that was mailed to her full and correct address. Hansen testified before the ALJ that she was informed by a department representative on May 20, 2002, that her application would be denied and a written decision would be issued shortly. Nevertheless, she did not contact the Department until September 5, 2002, when she sought to "reopen" her claim. Hansen argues for the first time before this court that she received a copy of the decision in July, 2002. Even if this newly asserted fact is considered, it also suggests that her appeal should have been filed before September, 2002. Contrary to her claim before this court and in the agency, the Board accepted her assertion that she did not receive the decision mailed on May 24, 2002.

The Board concluded that Hansen had not demonstrated good cause for late filing of her appeal to the Board. Applying departmental rules, the Board concluded Hansen had not shown that the appeal was filed within ten days of actual receipt of the decision, had not demonstrated that the delay was beyond her control, and had not shown that the delay was due to circumstances that were compelling and reasonable. See Utah Admin. Code R994-406-308. "An agency's application of law to its findings of fact will not be disturbed unless its determination 'exceeds the bounds of reasonableness and rationality.'" Johnson v. Department of Emp. Sec., 782 P.2d 965, 968 (Utah Ct. App. 1989) (citations omitted). The Board's decision was reasonable and rational.

We affirm the decision of the Workforce Appeals Board and dismiss the petition for review.

______________________________

Norman H. Jackson,

Presiding Judge

______________________________

Judith M. Billings,

Associate Presiding Judge

______________________________

Russell W. Bench, Judge