History
  • No items yet
midpage
P.S. VS. BOARD OF REVIEW(BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR)
A-0734-15T1
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.
Jun 7, 2017
Read the full case

Background

  • P.S. resigned from her account executive position at NBC40/Access 1 on August 19, 2013, after alleging sexual harassment by the station’s general manager, Ron Smith, and other workplace disputes.
  • She applied for unemployment benefits; the Deputy Director determined she was disqualified because she voluntarily quit without good cause attributable to work.
  • At the Appeal Tribunal telephonic hearing, the Tribunal found she left without good cause, noting Smith had been terminated over three months before her resignation; the Tribunal denied benefits in a decision mailed December 9, 2013. P.S. did not appeal within 20 days, so the decision became final.
  • During discovery in P.S.’s separate civil suit, company witnesses and a termination letter indicated Smith was fired for violating the sexual harassment policy; P.S. contended this contradicted Access 1’s hearing testimony.
  • On March 23, 2015, P.S. filed a late appeal to the Board of Review asserting newly discovered evidence justified extending the appeal period; the Board dismissed the appeal as untimely under N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c), finding no good cause to excuse the delay.
  • The Appellate Division affirmed, concluding the newly disclosed reason for Smith’s termination did not excuse the 13-month delay because Smith’s departure well before P.S.’s resignation undermined any claim that his presence caused her to quit; P.S.’s own testimony showed she knew Smith was fired for sexual harassment prior to the Tribunal hearing.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether the Board erred in dismissing P.S.’s appeal as untimely under the 20‑day statute P.S.: discovery revealed new evidence (company testimony and a termination letter) showing Smith was fired for sexually harassing her, constituting good cause to file late Board/Access 1: statutory deadline applies; P.S. failed to show circumstances outside her control or unforeseeable delay Held: No error—Board reasonably found no good cause to excuse 13‑month delay; affirmed
Whether newly obtained evidence about the reason for Smith’s termination entitles P.S. to reconsideration P.S.: Access 1 misrepresented the reason for Smith’s termination at the Tribunal; that misrepresentation affected benefits determination Respondents: Smith’s termination occurred months before resignation, so the reason for termination is irrelevant to her decision to quit Held: Evidence immaterial to timeliness or merits because Smith’s prior departure meant she had no work‑related cause to quit
Whether due process required admission of late appeal due to alleged perjured testimony P.S.: relying on fairness, she should not be prejudiced by respondents’ alleged false testimony Respondents: procedural deadline and lack of prejudice; no extraordinary due process basis Held: No due process violation; exceptions to deadline not triggered here
Whether appellate review should overturn Board as arbitrary/capricious P.S.: Board’s dismissal was arbitrary given new evidence Respondents: Board’s decision supported by record and precedent giving deference to agency findings Held: Agency decision afforded deference and was supported by record; not arbitrary or capricious

Key Cases Cited

  • In re Stallworth, 208 N.J. 182 (overview of limited appellate review of agency decisions)
  • Henry v. Rahway State Prison, 81 N.J. 571 (standards for judicial review of administrative actions)
  • Thurber v. City of Burlington, 387 N.J. Super. 279 (agency decisions entitled to presumption of reasonableness)
  • Matter of Vey, 272 N.J. Super. 199 (deference to administrative factfinding)
  • Campbell v. Dep't of Civil Serv., 39 N.J. 556 (standard for reversing administrative findings)
  • In re Herrmann, 192 N.J. 19 (judicial review limitations of agency determinations)
  • Rivera v. Bd. of Review, 127 N.J. 578 (good‑cause exceptions to statutory appeal deadlines where due process requires)
  • Garzon v. Bd. of Review, 370 N.J. Super. 1 (Board regulations and flexibility to excuse late appeals in limited circumstances)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: P.S. VS. BOARD OF REVIEW(BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR)
Court Name: New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Date Published: Jun 7, 2017
Docket Number: A-0734-15T1
Court Abbreviation: N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.