Allen v. J.R. Gettier & Associates.

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY HENRY C. ALLEN, ) ) Appellant (pro se), ) ) v. ) ) J.R. GETTIER & ASSOCIATES ) and ) UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ) APPEAL BOARD, ) ) Appellees. ) C.A. No. 02A-01-009 Date Submitted: April 24, 2002 Date Decided: May 22, 2002 MEMORANDUM OPINION U PON E MPLOYEE S A PPEAL F ROM THE U NEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE A PPEAL B OARD AFFIRMED Henry C . Allen, B ear, De laware , Appellant - Claimant Below. Robert F. Stewart, Jr., Esquire, Newark, Delaware, Appellee - Employer Below. Stephani Ballard, Esquire, Wilmington, Delaware, Appellee - UIAB Below Allen v. J.R. Gettier & Assoc., et al. C.A. No. 02A-01-009 HLA May 22, 2002 Page 2 This 22nd day of May 2002 upon review of the record below, it appears to the Court that: FACTS This is an appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board ( UIAB ) which determined that Henry C. Allen ( Claimant ) appeal, from the UIAB s decision that he w as disqu alified f rom rec eiving u nemp loyment b enefits , was u ntimely. Claimant was employed as a security guard for J.R. Gettier & Associates ( Employer ) from February 10, 2000 through July 28, 2001. On or about August 5, 2001 Claimant filed for unemployment benefits. A Claims Deputy found that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits. This dec ision was based on Employer s representations that Claimant last worked on July 30, 2001, then took a two-week vacation. Employer contends that the site manager tried to contact Claimant after the vacation but Claimant did not call back. When Claimant eventually called back, the position was fi lled. The Claims Deputy thus determined that Claimant voluntarily quit without good cause. This decision set forth in a Notice of Determination was dated and mailed September 21, 2001. Pursuant to the statute, Claimant had ten (10) days from the date of Allen v. J.R. Gettier & Assoc., et al. C.A. No. 02A-01-009 HLA May 22, 2002 Page 3 mailing of the No tice of Determination to f ile an appeal from the C laims Deputy s determina tion. Thus, C laimant had until Octob er 1, 2001 to file an app eal. Claimant did not file an appeal until October 11, 2001, ten days after the last day he could appeal. Claimant claims he was late in filing his appeal as he did not receive the Notice of Determination. Claimant had moved from his last known address registered with the Department of Labor. Claimant filed a change of address form with the United States Postal Service ( USPS ) but allegedly had problems receiving mail at the new address. Claimant admits that he did not change his address with the Department of Labor until October 11, 2001. On November 4, 2001, a hearing was held by the Appeals Referee solely on the issue of timeliness. Michael Chitwood ( Chitwood ), a Claims Deputy, testified that on September 21, 2001 Claimant s record address at the Department of Labor was 902 Governor House Circle, Wilmington Delaware. Chitwood testified that the Notice of Determ ination w as sent to that add ress and never r eturned by the U SPS a s unde liverabl e. At the h earing, C laiman t ackno wledg ed he d id not fil e an ap peal un til Octob er 11, 20 01. He testified that he went to the UIAB on October 11 because he had not heard anything from them and wanted to know the status of his benefits. At that time, he was informed that he was disqualified from receiving benefits and immediately he filed an appeal. He Allen v. J.R. Gettier & Assoc., et al. C.A. No. 02A-01-009 HLA May 22, 2002 Page 4 testified that he had change d his address with the U SPS to 2 Bo ggs Lane, Bea r, Delaware but did not rece ive any m ail from the De partme nt of L abor th ere. In a decision dated November 21, 2001 the Appeals Referee issued an opinion holding that Claimant s late appeal was jurisdictionally barred and no circumstances justified a waiver. Claimant appealed the Referee s decision to the UIAB on November 26, 2001. The UIAB affirmed the below decision ruling that Claimant s late appeal was jurisdicti onally ba rred. Cl aiman t then file d this ap peal on Januar y 24, 200 2. STANDARD OR REVIEW When reviewing a decision of the UIAB this Court determines whether the decision is supported by substan tial evidence and wh ether the Board s proc eedings are free fro m lega l error. Unemployment Ins. Bd. of Dep t. of Labor v. Duncan, 337 A.2d 308, 309 (Del. 1975 ); Avon Products, Inc. v. Wilson, 513 A.2d 131 5, 1317 (Del. 1986 ). Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequ ate to su pport a conclu sion. Breeding v. Contractors-One-Inc., 549 A.2d 1102, 1104 (D el. 1988). T he Board is to solve an y questions as to credibility and co nflicts in testimony; wh ile the Cou rt is to determin e only wheth er there is satisfa ctory proof to suppo rt a factu al findin g. Duncan, 337 A.2d at 309; Abex Corp. v. Todd, 235 A.2d 271, 273 (Del. 1967). ANA LYSIS Allen v. J.R. Gettier & Assoc., et al. C.A. No. 02A-01-009 HLA May 22, 2002 Page 5 Claimant s brief offers no specific challenge to the UIAB s factual findings nor application of law. Claimant merely asserts that he never received the Notice of Determination as he moved from the record address of the Department of Labor and had problems with the U SPS forw arding his mail. After a review of the record the Co urt finds that the UIAB s decision is supported by substantial evidence and is free from legal error fo r the rea sons se t forth b elow. The UIAB found that Claimant s appeal was jurisdictionally barred. This bar is set forth in 19 Del. C . § 3318, w hich states in re levant part: Unless a claimant or a last employer . . . files an appeal within 10 calendar days after such Claims Deputy s determination was mailed to the last known ad dresses of the claimant an d the last employer, the Claims D eputy s determina tion shall be f inal and be nefits shall be paid or den ied in accordance therewith. There is no dispute that C laimant s appeal was f iled after this ten-day time limit. Further, there is no dispute that Claimant s last known address was 902 Governor House Circle, Wilmington, Delaware. The Supreme Court stated in Funk v. Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd., 591 A.2d 222, 226 (Del. 1991 ), that: We are of the opinion that a statutory ten-day time limit for filing an administrative appeal is reasonable. Its application in this case where the claimant had notice through prior experience of the possible misdelivery of his mail and where the misdelivery was made through no fault of the Department of Labor did not violate the claimant's rights. Allen v. J.R. Gettier & Assoc., et al. C.A. No. 02A-01-009 HLA May 22, 2002 Page 6 Here, there was no evidence of fault on the part of the Department of Labor. The Department of Labor mailed the Notice of Determination to Claimant s last known address. Claimant made no effort before October 11, 2001 to change his address with the Departm ent of La bor, despite k nown p roblems w ith the US PS forw arding his m ail to his new address. Whereas Claimant filed his appeal twenty-one days after the mailing of the Notice of Determin ation, the D epartmen t of Labo r mailed the N otice of D etermination to Claimant s last known address and Claimant admits that he did not change his address with the Department of Labor until October 11, 2001 despite known problems with the USPS forwarding his mail, the Court finds substantial evidence to support the decision of the UIAB. For the forgoing reasons the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Boa rd is h ereb y AFFIRMED. IT IS SO ORDERED. ______________________________________ ALFORD , J. Original: Prothonotary s Office - Civil Division

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.