Justin M. Robinson, App/cross-res. v. Employment Security Dept, Res/cross-app.
73619-1
| Wash. Ct. App. | Jul 17, 2017Background
- Justin Robinson worked for Target and on May 17–18, 2014 communicated his intent to quit to supervisors; Robinson says he gave two weeks' notice (last day May 31), Target says he resigned effective immediately.
- After a May 18 phone call with HR manager Emily Hughes, Target removed Robinson from the schedule and stopped pay; Hughes did not testify at the administrative hearing.
- At the administrative hearing Target presented testimony from Annie Kroshus summarizing emails from Hughes (the emails were not admitted) and testimony from Robinson that he had given two weeks' notice.
- The ALJ and the Commissioner found Robinson not credible and concluded he resigned effective immediately, disqualifying him from unemployment benefits.
- The superior court remanded for additional fact-finding because the ALJ’s decision relied on unreliable hearsay (Kroshus’s summary of Hughes’s emails); the Court of Appeals granted discretionary review.
Issues
| Issue | Robinson's Argument | Target/Department's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the superior court could reopen the record for additional evidence | Superior court lacked authority to reopen record; review limited to agency record | Remand for fact-finding was proper because unreliability of evidence undermined the record | Superior court abused discretion; record reopening not authorized under APA (remand for new evidence denied) |
| Whether substantial evidence supports finding Robinson resigned effective immediately | Decision rests on unreliable hearsay (Kroshus summarizing emails); without it record does not support resignation effective immediately | Even without the hearsay, circumstantial, nonhearsay evidence (HR practices, rehire code, scheduling facts) supports the finding | The admissible record does not supply substantial evidence that Robinson resigned effective immediately; commissioner's finding unsupported |
| Proper remedy when agency finding rests on unreliable hearsay and credibility is unsettled | Robinson sought reversal and benefits + attorney fees | Department urged affirmance | Court remanded to the agency to reexamine the existing record and issue new findings/conclusions; did not order benefits or fees now |
| Burden of proof and credibility on remand | Robinson argued agency failed to meet its burden to prove a voluntary quit | Department maintained the agency decision is prima facie correct and challenger must show invalidity | Court directed agency on remand to clarify burden allocation and reassess credibility in light of this opinion |
Key Cases Cited
- Safeco Ins. Cos. v. Meyering, 102 Wn.2d 385 (Wash. 1984) (distinguishing voluntary quits from discharges for unemployment-benefits purposes)
- Campbell v. State Emp't Sec. Dep't, 180 Wn.2d 566 (Wash. 2014) (appellate courts apply APA standards and review agency record)
- Hong v. Dep't of Social & Health Svcs., 146 Wn. App. 698 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008) (remand under RCW 34.05.562(2)(c) when agency improperly excluded evidence)
- Scheeler v. Dep't of Emp't Sec., 122 Wn. App. 484 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004) (courts defer to agency credibility determinations based on witness demeanor)
- Martini v. State Emp't Sec. Dep't, 98 Wn. App. 791 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000) (precedential commissioner opinions are persuasive authority)