Opinion
22-ALJ-22-0134-AP
06-30-2022
Kanikashani C. Massey, Appellant, v. South Carolina Department of Employment and Workforce, Respondent, In Re: 22-HA-0000198.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Ralph King Anderson, III Chief Administrative Law Judge
This matter comes before the Administrative Law Court (Court or ALC) on an appeal filed by Kanikashani C. Massey (Appellant) on April 11, 2022, contesting the decision of the South Carolina Department Employment and Workforce (Department) finding Appellant's appeal from the claim adjudicator's determination was untimely. The Department initially denied Appellant's request to backdate her claim for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance PUA) benefits. However, based on additional guidance from the U.S. Department of Labor applicable to Appellant's backdate request, the Department reviewed Appellant's request for redetermination. On June 2, 2021, the Department filed a Motion to Dismiss (Motion) on the ground that Appellant's redetermination was issued on May 31, 2022, approving Appellant's backdate request, and holding her eligible for benefits effective March 15, 2022. Thus, rendering the case moot. As of the date of this Order, Appellant has not filed a Response to the Motion.
Before any action can be maintained, a justiciable controversy must exist. Byrd v. Irmo High Sch., 321 S.C. 426, 430, 468 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1996). "A justiciable controversy is a real and substantial controversy appropriate for judicial determination, as opposed to a dispute or difference of a contingent, hypothetical or abstract character." Sloan v. Greenville Cty., 356 S.C. 531, 546, 590 S.E.2d 338, 346 (Ct.App.2003) (Sloan I). "Justiciability encompasses several doctrines, including ripeness, mootness, and standing." Wilson v. Dallas, 403 S.C. 411, 423, 743 SE.2d 746, 753 (2013). "A case becomes moot when judgment, if rendered, will have no practical legal effect upon the existing controversy." Sloan v. Greenville Cty., 380 S.C. 528, 535, 670 SE.2d 663, 667 (Ct.App.2009) (Sloan III). "Mootness also arises when some event occurs making it impossible for the reviewing court to grant effectual relief." Id. Because the Department issued a redetermination of the backdate issue underlying the timeliness issue that is before the Court, there is no longer a matter of controversy between the parties, the case is moot and must be dismissed. See Byrd, 321 S.C. at 430, 468 S.E.2d at 864; Sloan II, 379 S.C. at 167, 666 S.E.2d at 240.
There are three exceptions to mootness. See Sloan III at 535, 670 S.E.2d at 667. However, none of these exceptions are applicable in the instant case.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case be DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.