Brenner v. Department of Workforce Services
2016 UT App 80
| Utah Ct. App. | 2016Background
- Brenner worked in IT support for AlphaGraphics and received a suspicious email on Sept. 16, 2015.
- His supervisor allegedly instructed him to mark the message as spam and close the case; Brenner instead opened the email and its attachment.
- Opening the attachment installed a virus that encrypted Employer computers and required ~8 hours of repair work.
- Employer discharged Brenner after learning he ignored instructions and caused the virus; Brenner filed for unemployment benefits.
- The Administrative Law Judge and the Workforce Appeals Board credited Employer’s testimony, found Brenner knowingly disregarded instructions, and denied benefits as a discharge for just cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Brenner was terminated for "just cause" | Brenner contends he was not given instructions on handling the suspicious email | Employer says Brenner was told to mark it as spam and close it, but he opened it | Board and court held Brenner was discharged for just cause; denial of benefits affirmed |
| Whether element of culpability is met | Brenner implies his conduct was not sufficiently serious | Employer argues conduct jeopardized its interests by exposing systems to a virus and causing financial harm | Court found conduct sufficiently serious to justify discharge |
| Whether Brenner had knowledge of expected conduct | Brenner claims lack of familiarity with phishing and insufficient instruction | Employer asserts it instructed Brenner and he should have known opening a suspicious e-mail could cause harm | Court accepted Board’s credibility finding that Brenner knew or should have foreseen harm |
| Whether conduct was within Brenner’s control | Brenner implies he lacked intent or was unaware | Employer contends Brenner could have complied with instructions and chose not to | Court held element of control established because Brenner voluntarily opened the email despite instructions |
Key Cases Cited
- Brehm v. Workforce Appeals Board, 339 P.3d 945 (Utah Ct. App. 2014) (mixed question of law and fact; Board entitled to deference)
- Carbon County v. Workforce Appeals Board, 308 P.3d 477 (Utah 2013) (unemployment benefit rulings are fact-like and deserve deference)
- Johnson v. Department of Employment Sec., 782 P.2d 965 (Utah Ct. App. 1989) (will not disturb Board’s law-to-fact application unless unreasonable)