Opinion
C.A. No. 03A-11-001 WLW.
Submitted: March 8, 2005.
Decided: June 7, 2005.
Upon Appeal from the Decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. Affirmed.
Nancy E. Haggerty, pro se.
Mary Page Bailey, Esquire, Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware; attorneys for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
ORDER
Upon consideration of Claimant's appeal from the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board and the record before this Court, it appears to the Court that:
Nancy E. Haggerty ("Claimant") applied for unemployment benefits on July 13, 2003 contending that the continuous harassment by her manager forced her to vacate her position at Super Fresh Food Markets. The Claims Deputy denied her request and the Appeals Referee, in a decision dated and mailed September 12, 2003, affirmed the decision concluding that Claimant had failed to exhaust her administrative remedies and was therefore disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. More important to the issue presently before this Court, the decision of the Appeals Referee informed Claimant that the last day to file an appeal with the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ("UIAB") was September 22, 2003.
On September 25, 2003, three days after the time period for filing an appeal had expired, Claimant appealed the Referee's Decision to the UIAB. The UIAB declined to accept Claimant's untimely appeal and the Referee's Decision became final and binding. On November 17, 2003, Claimant appealed the decision of the UIAB contending that the UIAB abused its discretion in failing to accept her appeal. Although Claimant acknowledged that her appeal was untimely, Claimant argued that the delay was caused by the hurricane and should therefore be excused. However, Claimant subsequently informed the Court, in a letter filed March 9, 2004, "The reason my appeal was late I said was because of the hurricane and the state of emergency but now looking back I would say it was due to my addiction."
Claimant letter filed March 9, 2004.
The review of an Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision is limited to an examination of the record for errors of law and a determination of whether substantial evidence exists to support the Board's findings of fact and conclusions of law. Decisions by the Board which are discretionary in nature will be undisturbed by this Court unless such decisions are clearly unreasonable or capricious. The party challenging the Board's decision bears the burden of proving that such decision was unreasonable. In the case sub judice, Claimant has failed to meet such burden.
UIAB v. Duncan, 337 A.2d 308 (Del. 1975).
In re Kennedy, 472 A.2d 1317, 1331 (Del. 1984).
See Mobil Oil Corp. v. Board of Adjustment, 283 A.2d 837, 839 (Del.Super. 1971).
The time frame for filing an appeal is statutory. Although the UIAB has discretion in accepting late appeals, Claimant has failed to show that the UIAB abused its discretion by refusing to accept her untimely appeal. Claimant was given full notice by the Appeals Referee of the last date to file an appeal and still failed to file her appeal within the stated mandated period. Although Claimant originally asserted that her appeal was untimely as a result of the hurricane and the state of emergency, Claimant has now conceded that the late filing was a product of her addiction. Claimant's addiction does not constitute a valid excuse necessitating that the Board accept her untimely appeal. Accordingly, Claimant has failed to show that the decision of the UIAB was arbitrary or capricious and the decision of the UIAB is hereby affirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.