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

EILEEN M THOMPSON, Employe

AURORA MEDICAL GROUP INC, Employer

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE DECISION
Hearing No. 99602308RC

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 employe's request for hearing on the merits is dismissed. The initial determination shall remain in effect.

Dated and mailed May 27, 1999
thompei.usd : 105 : 1   PC 711

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ Pamela I. Anderson, Commissioner

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The commission agrees with the administrative law judge that the employe's request for hearing is properly dismissed. The standard for a late appeal is a relatively strict one: reason beyond control. That is, where an appeal is late, the statutes require dismissal of it unless it was late for a reason beyond the appellant's control. In this case, the employe thought she needed an attorney to file her appeal. She could only have thought that, though, by not having carefully read the appeal information on the initial determination. Had she carefully read that information, she would have known that an attorney was not necessary. Since it was within her control to have read the appeal information carefully, though, she may not use her belief as to the need for an attorney to justify her late appeal. The employe's testimony at the hearing in the case also suggests, finally, that the employe had decided not to fight the employer over her eligibility for unemployment insurance. It is a party's right to so acquiesce, but that essentially is abandonment of the claim. For these reasons, and those stated in the appeal tribunal decision, the commission has affirmed that decision.

cc: AHC/RACINE

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