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

JEFFREY J WEBER REEK, Employee

AMERITECH CORP, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 03404014AP


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 employee is eligible for benefits, if otherwise qualified.

Dated and mailed June 9, 2004
weberje . usd : 132 : 1    PC 714.06 PC 714.07 

/s/ James T. Flynn, Chairman

/s/ David B. Falstad, Commissioner

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The employer has petitioned for commission review of the adverse appeal tribunal decision that found the employee was discharged but not for misconduct connected with his work for the employer. The commission has reviewed the record in this matter and agrees with the ALJ's findings and conclusion. The employer's documentation was insufficient to establish that the employee falsified his application. Further, the employer submitted only a printout from the consolidated court automation program (CCAP) to establish that the employee had been convicted of a crime. The Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (WCCA) website specifically states, "CCAP provides no warranties insuring the accuracy of the information contained in records available on WCCA." The commission has previously stated that a printout from the CCAP is hearsay and may not be relied on to establish that the employee has been convicted of a crime. See, Ray v. Wal Mart Associates Inc., UI Dec. Hearing No. 01611512MW (LIRC Aug. 9, 2002).

For the above reasons, and for the reasons set forth in the appeal tribunal decision, the commission affirms that decision.

cc: James Schmidt


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


uploaded 2004/06/16