STATE OF WISCONSIN
LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION
P O BOX 8126, MADISON, WI 53708-8126 (608/266-9850)

JUDITH A LANDERMAN, Claimant

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 03604709MW


An administrative law judge (ALJ) for the Division of Unemployment Insurance of the Department of Workforce Development issued a decision in this matter. A timely petition for review was filed.

The commission has considered the petition and the positions of the parties, and it has reviewed the evidence submitted to the ALJ. Based on its review, the commission agrees with the decision of the ALJ, and it adopts the findings and conclusion in that decision as its own.

DECISION

The decision of the administrative law judge is affirmed. Accordingly, the claimant's request for hearing is dismissed, and the department's determination remains in effect.

Dated and mailed January 21, 2004
landeju . usd : 115 : 1  PC 712.6  PC 715 

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ James T. Flynn, Commissioner

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION


The appeal tribunal decision dismissed the claimant's appeal of the department's determination based on the administrative law judge's conclusion that the claimant had failed to appear for the scheduled hearing within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 108.09(4)(d).

The claimant argues in her petition for commission review that she was present at the hearing, but that she was denied full and fair opportunity to be heard within the meaning of Wis. Stat. § 108.09(4)(a).

The commission reviewed the tape recording of what transpired at the hearing. This review revealed that, as the administrative law judge was summarizing what had been discussed by the parties off the record prior to the convening of the hearing, the claimant interrupted him to state that, "And everybody was rude to me in this meeting, so you better train them on how to treat people." The administrative law judge then stated, "Ms. Landerman, if you'd care to have a seat, you can state anything relevant." Despite this invitation from the administrative law judge, the claimant left the hearing room, slamming the door behind her, and did not return or in any other way indicate that she wanted to participate further in the hearing process.

The claimant's failure to offer any evidence after the hearing was convened, despite the full and fair opportunity to do so offered her by the administrative law judge, requires a conclusion that she failed to appear at the hearing, and the commission agrees with the administrative law judge that it was appropriate to dismiss her appeal of the department's determination as a result. See, Vogel v. Albert Trostel Packings Ltd., UI Hearing No. 91-004482JV (LIRC Nov. 22, 1991); Keegan v. Remedy Intelligent Staffing, Inc., UI Hearing No. 00003002MD (LIRC Sept. 11, 2000). Despite the claimant's representations to the contrary, there was nothing in the hearing record from which to conclude that the conduct of the administrative law judge was anything but helpful, patient, and professional.

 


[ Search UC Decisions ] - [ UC Digest - Main Index ] - [ UC Legal Resources ] - [ LIRC Home Page ]


uploaded 2004/01/26