DANIEL ABADOM v. DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE SERVICES (Majority)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Cite as 2023 Ark. App. 534 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. E-22-419 Opinion Delivered November DANIEL ABADOM 15, 2023 APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS APPELLANT BOARD OF REVIEW V. [NO. 2022-BR-00318] DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE SERVICES REMANDED FOR FURTHER APPELLEE FINDINGS MIKE MURPHY, Judge This is an unbriefed unemployment-benefits case. A companion case, No. E-22-420, is also being handed down today. Here, appellant, Daniel Abadom, challenges the Arkansas Board of Review’s (Board’s) decision that Abadom failed to establish good cause for the delay in filing an initial claim, thus denying his request to backdate his claim. We are unable to give this case and its companion meaningful review, however, due to inconsistencies in the record. Accordingly, we remand for the record to be clarified to settle the inconsistencies and, if necessary, for additional findings and conclusion of law. After a thorough review of the record, it appears that there are discrepancies that cannot be overlooked. In this case, the Board ostensibly affirms the decision made by the Appeal Tribunal in appeal No. 2021-AT-23620. However, the Tribunal decision concerns whether Abadom is or was unemployed, was physically and mentally able to perform suitable work, was available for such work, and doing those things a reasonably prudent individual would be expected to do to secure work as required by Arkansas Code Annotated section 11-10-507(3)(A) (Supp. 2023). Given this inconsistency, we are directing that the record be settled. See Dawson v. Dir., 2023 Ark. App. 374, at 3. If adequate findings of fact are not made on the issue presented, we remand to the Board for findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which to perform proper appellate review. Id. Therefore, to remedy the inconsistencies, we remand to the Board with instructions to ascertain if a mistake has been made and, if so, to provide notice to the parties and correct the record accordingly and also, if necessary, for additional findings and conclusion of law. Remanded for further findings. WOOD and BROWN, JJ., agree. Daniel Abadom, pro se appellant. Cynthia L. Uhrynowycz, Associate General Counsel, for appellee. 2
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.
