2 N.E.3d 13
Ind. Ct. App.2013Background
- Price has been a part-time, on-call event worker for Employer since 1991; employment is on an as-needed basis with no regular hours.
- Price periodically experiences short unemployment and applies for unemployment benefits.
- Two unemployment claims were filed: Cause No. 13-R-830 (week ending Nov. 26, 2011) and Cause No. 13-R-831 (week ending July 7, 2012).
- Claims deputy determined Price was not unemployed for either period; ALJ affirmed.
- ALJ concluded Price was not unemployed because she worked more than 26 weeks on a part-time, as-needed basis and had remuneration; claimed lack of identifiable weeks with no remuneration.
- Review Board affirmed the ALJ, denying benefits for both periods; Price appeals to Court of Appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Review Board properly reviewed the evidence and allowed additional evidence. | Price contends the Board abused discretion by not accepting additional evidence. | Price waived this claim for appellate review by not providing cogent argument or authority. | Waived claim; affirmed. |
| Whether Price proved unemployment during the weeks in question. | Price asserts she was unemployed during the periods because of lack of work. | Record shows Price worked on a regular on-call basis with remuneration in those periods. | Not unemployed; benefits suspended during weeks with remuneration; affirmed. |
| Whether Price’s lack of identifiable weeks without remuneration undermines eligibility. | Price could not specify weeks with no remuneration. | She failed to demonstrate lack of remuneration due to no work. | Sufficient evidence supports that she was not unemployed; affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Value World Inc. of Ind. v. Review Bd. of Ind. Unemp’t Dep’t of Workforce Dev., 927 N.E.2d 945 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (we consider the agency’s factual findings and only reverse for legal error)
- Pope v. Wabash Valley Human Servs., Inc., 500 N.E.2d 209 (Ind. Ct. App. 1986) (unemployment definition and eligibility requirements)
- Cooper v. State, 854 N.E.2d 831 (Ind. Ct. App. 2006) (waiver and need for cogent argument on appeal)
- Davis v. State, 835 N.E.2d 1102 (Ind. Ct. App. 2005) (appellate waiver for lack of authority/cogent argument)