Ryan J. Wilson, Relator v. Harris Davis Rebar, Department of Employment and Economic Development
A16-930
| Minn. Ct. App. | Dec 27, 2016Background
- DEED determined Ryan J. Wilson was ineligible for unemployment benefits because he quit after a change in working conditions not caused by the employer; Wilson appealed.
- DEED scheduled a telephonic appeal hearing for March 29, 2016 at 10:45 a.m. and informed Wilson the ULJ would call him at the phone number on file.
- The ULJ called Wilson at 10:48 a.m. and again at 11:00 a.m.; Wilson did not answer either call and the ULJ left voicemails warning the hearing would proceed without him.
- The ULJ dismissed Wilson’s appeal for failure to participate; Wilson requested reconsideration, asserting phone technical issues and that he had checked into a treatment facility and his phone would not charge.
- The ULJ denied reconsideration, finding Wilson lacked “good cause” because his explanations were minimal, inconsistent, and did not show due diligence (e.g., no alternative number, no timely rescheduling, no specifics about attempts to call back).
- Wilson appealed to the Court of Appeals, which reviewed the ULJ’s discretionary denial for abuse of discretion and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ULJ abused discretion in denying an additional hearing after Wilson missed the telephonic hearing | Wilson: technical phone failure and treatment-facility circumstances prevented participation; his absence constituted good cause | DEED/ULJ: Wilson failed to show good cause because explanations were vague, inconsistent, and showed lack of due diligence (no alternate number, no timely reschedule, no detail on callback attempts) | Court: No abuse of discretion; ULJ properly found no good cause and denied an additional hearing |
Key Cases Cited
- Skarhus v. Davanni’s Inc., 721 N.W.2d 340 (Minn. App. 2006) (deference to ULJ’s decision not to hold additional hearing; abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Goodwin v. BPS Guard Servs., Inc., 524 N.W.2d 28 (Minn. App. 1994) (affirming denial of additional hearing where appellant failed to show good cause and did not attempt to reschedule)
- Appelhof v. Comm’r of Jobs & Training, 450 N.W.2d 589 (Minn. App. 1990) (evidence not presented to the ULJ generally cannot be considered on appeal)