Mendes v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act
Citations
- 199 Conn. App. 25
Syllabus
The defendant administrator of the Unemployment Compensation Act appealed to this court from the judgment of the Superior Court sustaining the plaintiff's appeal from the decision of the Board of Review of the Employment Security Appeals Division, which affirmed the determina- tion by an appeals referee that the plaintiff was not entitled to certain unemployment benefits. The plaintiff, who had been employed by A Co., had been found eligible for unemployment benefits by the adminis- trator. A Co. appealed from that decision, and the appeals referee, following a hearing, reversed the decision of the administrator to award benefits to the plaintiff. The plaintiff, who did not attend the hearing before the appeals referee, thereafter filed a motion to open the referee's decision, arguing that he had not received notice of the hearing. The referee denied the plaintiff's motion on the ground that he had not established good cause for his failure to participate in the hearing, finding that, the notice had been properly mailed to the plaintiff at his usual address where he had received all other notices, the notice had not been returned as undeliverable, and the plaintiff had admitted that he may have inadvertently discarded the notice. The board subsequently affirmed the decision of the referee, concluding that the evidence sup- ported the referee's findings and conclusion. Thereafter, the plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court, which found that there was no evidence that the defendant had properly mailed notice of the hearing before the appeals referee and remanded the case for a de novo appeal hearing before the referee. Held that the Superior Court exceeded its scope of authority by assessing the factual findings of the referee, as adopted by the board, and determining that because there was no evidence to support the referee's findings, the board had acted unreasonably, ille- gally, or in abuse of its discretion by denying the plaintiff's motion to open; in an appea
Judges: Alvord; Elgo; Bright
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.