Schooley v. DWS

Schooley v. DWS

IN THE UTAH COURT OF APPEALS

----ooOoo----

Douglas Schooley,

Petitioner,

v.

Department of Workforce Services, Workforce Appeals Board,

Respondent.

MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)
 

Case No. 20040266-CA
 

F I L E D
(May 20, 2004)
 

2004 UT App 170

 

-----

Original Proceeding in this Court

Attorneys: Douglas Schooley, Taylorsville, Petitioner Pro Se

Suzan Pixton, Salt Lake City, for Respondent

-----

Before Judges Billings, Greenwood, and Orme.

PER CURIAM:

    Schooley petitions this court for review of the final decision of the Workforce Appeals Board (Board) affirming the assessment of an overpayment and penalty against Schooley, and his disqualification from receiving benefits for thirty-seven weeks. This case is before the court on a sua sponte motion for summary disposition.

    The issue is whether Schooley willfully misreported earnings to obtain benefits to which he was not entitled. He asserts that there is no showing of fraud, and that his misrepresentation was unintentional. He argues that the Board lacked sufficient evidence to support its findings. This court will reverse an administrative agency's findings of fact "only if the findings are not supported by substantial evidence." Drake v. Industrial Comm'n, 939 P.2d 177, 181 (Utah 1997).

    Claimants for unemployment benefits who file based on false information, and thus receive benefits to which they are not entitled, are required to repay the amounts paid and are barred from receiving benefits for particular time periods. See Utah Code Ann. § 35A-4-405(5)(a), (c) (2001). A claimant is ineligible for benefits for each week regarding which the claimant willfully made false statements or representations, or failed to report a material fact "to obtain any benefit." Id. § 35A-4-405(5)(a). A claimant will be barred from future benefits for specified time periods as a penalty for the misreporting. See id. Also, the claimant "shall repay" the amount of benefits actually received, plus a civil penalty equal to the benefits received "by direct reason of his fraud." Id. § 35A-4-405(5)(c).

    Under department rules, fraud requires "a willful misrepresentation or concealment of information for the purpose of obtaining unemployment benefits." Utah Admin. Code R994-405-501. To establish fraud, the department must show materiality, knowledge, and willfulness. See id. R994-405-502. Materiality is established when a claimant makes a misrepresentation for the purpose of obtaining any benefit payment to which the claimant is not entitled. See id. Knowledge is established when the claimant knew or should have known that the information submitted to the department was incorrect, or that he failed to provide required information. See id. Willfulness is established when "a claimant files claims or other documents containing false statements, responses or deliberate omissions." Id.

    The Board had substantial evidence on which to base its findings of ineligibility and fraud. For the weeks ending May 11 through June 14, 2003, Schooley was found ineligible for benefits because he "willfully made a false statement or representation" to obtain benefits in those weeks. Utah Code Ann. § 35A-4-405(5)(a). This finding is supported by the facts that Schooley filed claims for benefits in each of these weeks, and answered "no" to the question of whether he worked during these weeks, even though he knew he was working part-time. Schooley acknowledged receiving and reading the claim benefits manual, which states expressly that all earnings and work must be reported, and does not provide any exception for part-time work.

    The fraud elements of materiality, knowledge, and willfulness were all established by substantial evidence. Materiality was established because Schooley actually obtained benefits to which he was not entitled, based on the misrepresentations. Knowledge was established because Schooley had received and read the department's benefit information guide, and thus knew or should have known that part-time work was reportable. Although Schooley asserted he received misinformation from an employee, the Board noted that Schooley's credibility was diminished because he did not make any effort to correct his claims at the time he alleged he discovered his reporting error. Also, he under-reported his earnings even after learning he had to report part-time earnings. Willfulness was established by Schooley's filed claims containing false information.

    Based on the finding of fraud ineligibility for those weeks, Schooley was assessed an overpayment and penalty of $2084.00. This assessment is required by statute and is not discretionary. Section 35A-4-405(5)(c) provides that a claimant found ineligible due to providing false information "shall repay to the division the amount of benefits the claimant actually received and, as a civil penalty, an amount equal to the benefits the claimant received by direct reason of his fraud." Utah Code Ann. § 35A-4-405(5)(c). Thus, the Board was correct in assessing the fraud repayment. Additionally, the disqualification periods are mandatory under section 35A-4-405(5)(c), and were also properly assessed by the Board. See id.

    The Board's findings are supported by substantial evidence, and its application of law to the facts of this case is reasonable and rational. See Johnson v. Department of Employment Sec., 782 P.2d 965, 968 (Utah Ct. App. 1989). Accordingly, the decision of the Board is affirmed.

______________________________

Judith M. Billings,

Presiding Judge

______________________________

Pamela T. Greenwood, Judge

______________________________

Gregory K. Orme, Judge