History
  • No items yet
midpage
Persaud v. Department of Employment Security
131 N.E.3d 122
Ill. App. Ct.
2019
Read the full case

Background

  • Patricia Persaud worked as a patient service representative at Northwestern Memorial from Dec 2012 until termination on Sept 27, 2017.
  • Persaud repeatedly refused her manager Oneida McEachin’s requests (on Sept 25–27) to meet about a disciplinary action and performance-improvement plan, saying she was stressed and awaiting surgery/short-term disability.
  • McEachin warned Persaud that continued refusal would result in termination; after Persaud again refused on Sept 27, McEachin terminated her immediately.
  • Persaud filed for unemployment benefits; a claims adjudicator initially found no misconduct, but the Board of Review reversed, holding the refusal to follow a reasonable, lawful instruction constituted misconduct under 820 ILCS 405/602(A)(5).
  • Persaud sought administrative and circuit-court review; the circuit court affirmed the Board. Persaud appealed, challenging the Board’s finding that her refusal was misconduct.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether Persaud’s refusal to meet was misconduct under the Unemployment Insurance Act Persaud argued her refusal was an effort to seek a reasonable accommodation because of upcoming surgery/stress, not misconduct Northwestern and the Board argued the refusal was to obey a reasonable, lawful work instruction and falls within §602(A)(5) misconduct Court held refusal to follow reasonable, lawful instruction meets §602(A)(5); Persaud’s refusal was misconduct
Whether the Board’s factual finding that Persaud refused multiple meeting requests was against manifest weight of evidence Persaud did not deny refusing; argued context justified delay Board relied on manager’s testimony that Persaud repeatedly refused after warnings Court held factual finding was not against manifest weight of the evidence
Whether §602(A)(5) requires willfulness, harm, or repetition to establish misconduct Persaud implicitly argued general misconduct definition (willful, repeated, harmed) applies Board interpreted §602(A)(5) as an independent category not requiring willfulness, harm, or repetition Court held §602(A)(5) is an independent exception and does not require willfulness, harm, or repetition
Whether any §602(A)(5) exceptions (lack of ability/training or unsafe instruction) applied Persaud argued inability/medical stress justified refusal Northwestern/Board contended meeting was reasonable and safe to perform Court held no exception applied; instruction was reasonable and lawful, so misconduct upheld

Key Cases Cited

  • Cinkus v. Village of Stickney Municipal Officers Electoral Board, 228 Ill. 2d 200 (explaining standards of review for administrative decisions)
  • American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 31 v. Illinois State Labor Relations Board, State Panel, 216 Ill. 2d 569 (discussing mixed question review and standards)
  • Kouzoukas v. Retirement Board of the Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 234 Ill. 2d 446 (agency legal determinations reviewed de novo)
  • AFM Messenger Service, Inc. v. Department of Employment Security, 198 Ill. 2d 380 (standard for mixed question clear error review)
  • Waliczek v. Retirement Board of the Firemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 318 Ill. App. 3d 32 (interpretation of "notwithstanding" as creating an exception/independent clause)
  • Toner v. Retirement Board of the Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 259 Ill. App. 3d 67 (same context for "notwithstanding")
  • Sudzus v. Department of Employment Security, 393 Ill. App. 3d 814 (definition of a "reasonable" workplace instruction)
  • Livingston v. Department of Employment Security, 375 Ill. App. 3d 710 (instruction is reasonable if appropriately related to workplace expectations)
  • Abrahamson v. Illinois Department of Professional Regulation, 153 Ill. 2d 76 (limits on introducing new evidence on administrative review)
  • Pullman-Standard v. Swint, 456 U.S. 273 (definition and treatment of mixed questions of law and fact)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: Persaud v. Department of Employment Security
Court Name: Appellate Court of Illinois
Date Published: Aug 26, 2019
Citation: 131 N.E.3d 122
Docket Number: 1-18-0964
Court Abbreviation: Ill. App. Ct.