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

JESSIE J COLEMAN, Claimant

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 08003806MD


An administrative law judge (AU) 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 shall forfeit $3,096.00 in unemployment benefits that become payable by September 6, 2014.

Dated and mailed December 23, 2008
colemj2 . usd : 164 : 1   BR 330

/s/ James T. Flynn, Chairperson

/s/ Robert Glaser, Commissioner

/s/ Ann L. Crump, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In the petition for commission review the employee's representative argues that sufficient weight was not given to the employee's schizophrenia condition. The employee's representative states that the employee testified he did not take his medication consistently during the claim period and that failure to take the medication results in confusion and paranoia. The employee's representative indicates that the administrative law judge failed to observe that the employee demonstrated an inability to focus on questions in a responsible manner as result of his mental illness, and did not sufficiently weigh and explain why his condition could or could not have contributed to an intent to conceal wages. These arguments fail. At the hearing the employee testified that, during the time he was reporting his claim, he was taking his medications. The employee stated that the medications can cause him to become dehydrated, nauseated, and to be confused at times. However, the employee also stated that he understood the question, "Did you work?" and was aware that working for the employer in those weeks could reduce his benefits. The commission also notes that the employee told the adjudicator the reason he failed to report work and wages was that he had no phone and no money for a pay phone. That explanation was completely incredible, as the employee filed his claims by phone in each of the weeks at issue, and contradicts his current explanation that he was taking medications which cause him to be confused. The employee was not too confused to work, file benefit claims, and cash benefit checks for eighteen weeks, notwithstanding his mental illness. He expressed an understanding of and familiarity with the claim filing process. Under all the circumstances, the commission agrees with the appeal tribunal that the employee intentionally concealed his wages from the department during the weeks at issue. Accordingly, the appeal tribunal decision is affirmed.

cc: Cynthia Hernandez



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


uploaded 2009/01/26