McCoy v. Albin
298 Neb. 297
Neb.2017Background
- In 1995 the Nebraska Department of Labor mailed Troy McCoy a notice that he had been overpaid $850 in unemployment benefits; McCoy did not appeal and made no repayment.
- In 2016 Nebraska intercepted McCoy’s state income tax refund ($293) to apply toward that overpayment; McCoy appealed pro se, also disputing a 1997 interception ($217).
- An appeal tribunal held the 2016 interception was time-barred under Nebraska limitations statutes (§§ 25-206 and 25-218); the Department appealed to Sarpy County District Court, which affirmed.
- The Department appealed to the Nebraska Supreme Court, arguing the statutory setoff authority (Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-665(1)(c)) contains no limitations period and is not an “action” subject to general limitations statutes.
- The Supreme Court examined § 48-665’s four collection mechanisms (civil action, offset against future benefits, setoff against state refund, setoff against federal refund) and concluded the Legislature omitted a limitations period for tax-refund setoffs intentionally.
- The Court reversed the district court and appeal tribunal, holding no statute of limitations prevents the Department’s interception of McCoy’s state tax refund to offset the overpayment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether general statutes of limitations bar the Department from using § 48-665(1)(c) to set off a state tax refund against an unemployment overpayment | McCoy argued the interception was time-barred under §§ 25-206/25-218 (and § 25-1515 as to dormant judgments) | Department argued § 48-665(1)(c) contains no limitations period; setoff is not a civil action and general limitation statutes do not apply; waiver argument alternative | The Court held no statute of limitations applies to the state-tax-refund setoff under § 48-665(1)(c); § 25-1515 inapplicable because notice of overpayment is not a court judgment |
Key Cases Cited
- Marion’s v. Nebraska Dept. of Health & Human Servs., 289 Neb. 982 (administrative-review standard and scope)
- ML Manager v. Jensen, 287 Neb. 171 (statutory interpretation is a question of law)
- Arthur v. Microsoft Corp., 267 Neb. 586 (principles for ascertaining legislative intent and statutory construction)
- Tiedtke v. Whalen, 133 Neb. 301 (definition of commencement of civil actions)