Opinion
Civil Action No. 04A-03-013 SCD.
Submitted: November 24, 2004.
Decided: January 25, 2005.
Upon appeal from the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board denying certain unemployment benefits.
AFFIRMED.Shyra L. Dennis, New Castle, DE.
Karen V. Sullivan, Esquire, Oberly, Jennings Rhodunda, P.A., Wilmington, DE.
Mary Page Bailey, Esquire, Department of Justice, Wilmington, DE.
Dear Counsel:
On or about November 30, 2003, Claimant Shyra L. Dennis ("Dennis") filed a claim with the Department of Labor, Division of Unemployment Insurance, seeking unemployment compensation benefits pursuant to 19 Del. C. § 3301 et seq. On December 11, 2003, a Claims Deputy determined Dennis was disqualified from the receipt of benefits. On December 19, 2003, Dennis appealed the Claims Deputy's determination.
A hearing was held before a Referee on January 8, 2004. The Referee found that Dennis voluntarily quit her employment without good cause and was disqualified for receipt of unemployment compensation benefits.
On January 16, 2004, Dennis appealed the Referee's decision to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ("Board"). The Board held a hearing on February 11, 2004. During the hearing, Dennis again testified that she voluntarily quit. Dennis further admitted that Kingswood has an appeal process for employee grievances and that she quit prior to pursuing the employee grievance appeal process. The Board affirmed the Referee's decision finding that by failing to exhaust her administrative remedies, Dennis had voluntarily quit without good cause.
On March 29, 2004, Dennis filed this appeal. Dennis filed a document entitled "Opening Brief" on July 13, 2004. Kingswood filed a response August 4, 2004. No reply brief has been filed.
This Court has limited appellate review of a decision from an administrative agency. On appeal, this Court determines whether the agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence and is free from legal error. Substantial evidence is such relevant evidence that a reasonable mind would accept it as adequate to support a conclusion. This Court does not act as the trier of fact nor does it have authority to weigh the evidence, weigh issues of credibility, or make factual conclusions. Therefore, given an agency's specialized competence, this Court merely reviews whether the findings made by that agency are adequately supported by the evidence.
Devine v. Advanced Power Control, Inc., 663 A.2d 1205, 1209 (Del.Super. 1995) (citing General Motors Corp. v. Freeman, 164 A.2d 686, 688 (Del. 1960); Johnson v. Chrysler Corp., 213 A.2d 64, 66 (Del. 1965); General Motors Corp. v. Jarrell, 493 A.2d 978, 980 (Del.Super. 1985)).
Oceanport Ind. v. Wilmington Stevedores, 636 A.2d 892, 899 (Del. 1994); Battista v. Chrysler Corp., 517 A.2d 295, 297 (Del.Super. 1986).
Johnson, 213 A.2d at 66.
I find there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the Board's finding that Dennis voluntarily left her work without good cause attributable to the work. The Board's Decision is supported by substantial evidence, the testimony of the claimant herself. The Decision of the Board is AFFIRMED.
Good cause has been defined as "such cause as would justify one in voluntarily leaving the ranks of the employed. . . ." O'Neal's Bus Service, Inc. v. Employment Security Com'n, 269 A.2d 247, 249 (Del.Super. 1970) (internal citation omitted).
IT IS SO ORDERED.