Imperial Valet Services, Inc. v. Alvarado, 72 A.3d 165

In February 2004 DES found Alvarado eligible for unemployment benefits; Imperial Valet Services appealed to OAH, which reversed and held Alvarado quit without good cause.
This court vacated and remanded to allow Alvarado to develop testimony about humiliation at work.
On remand, ALJ Harmon heard Alvarado, Flores, and Thanos; Alvarado testified Thanos humiliated her with frequent verbal abuse; Flores corroborated.
Thanos testified he rarely spoke to Alvarado and delegated Spanish-speaking supervision; his testimony was not credited by the ALJ.
The ALJ credited Alvarado’s testimony, found she quit with good cause connected with the work, and awarded unemployment benefits.
The DC Court of Appeals affirmed, adopting a multi-factor approach to verbal abuse and finding substantial evidence supporting good cause to quit.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether verbal abuse constitutes good cause to quit	Alvarado: verbal abuse by Thanos justified quitting to avoid humiliation.	Imperial Valet: verbal abuse does not automatically amount to good cause to quit.	Yes; Verbal abuse can constitute good cause when the totality of circumstances supports it.

Dempsey v. Old Dominion Freight Lines, 645 So.2d 538 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994) (unreasonable verbal abuse may justify quitting)
Partee v. Winco Mfg., Inc., 141 S.W.3d 34 (Mo. Ct. App. 2004) (cannot endure verbal abuse as a condition of employment)
McPherson v. Emp’t Div., 285 Or. 541, 591 P.2d 1381 (Or. 1979) (employee not required to endure personal abuse)
In re Johnson, 67 A.D.3d 1228, 890 N.Y.S.2d 134 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009) (negative performance critique alone not good cause)
Rodriguez v. Filene’s Basement Inc., 905 A.2d 177 (D.C. 2006) (multifactor factual standard for review; affirm if rational from facts)
Bowman-Cook v. Washington Metro. Area Transit Auth., 16 A.3d 130 (D.C. 2011) (liberal construction of unemployment act to protect employees)