Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Miao v. Board of Review

January 28, 2009

JUDY MIAO, APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, AND THE ARC OF SOMERSET COUNTY, RESPONDENTS.



On appeal from a Final Decision of the Board of Review, Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Docket No. 169,575.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted December 15, 2008

Before Judges Carchman and R. B. Coleman.

Appellant Judy Miao, the former Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of the ARC of Somerset County, appeals from a final decision of the Board of Review, Department of Labor and Workforce Development (the Board) declaring her ineligible for additional unemployment benefits while she participated in training under the Workforce Development Partnership Program. We affirm.

Except for some confusion as to a "coding" issue that we address infra, the facts are not in significant dispute. Appellant was employed by ARC from June 8, 2005 to July 25, 2007, when her employer informed her that she was being placed on administrative leave pending a final decision by the ARC board as to her future employment. On August 3, 2007, the president of the board requested her resignation. Appellant refused, and she was discharged. Appellant filed a timely application for unemployment benefits, which were paid together with a $4,000 Workforce Development Program Grant. Appellant used the grant to enroll in a six-month Project Management Certification Course.

While participating in this training, appellant applied for additional unemployment benefits. The Deputy to the Director, Division of Unemployment Insurance denied the benefits. The Appeal Tribunal reached the same conclusion, and on February 20, 2008, the Board affirmed the Appeal Tribunal's decision.

In its decision, the Appeal Tribunal said:

The claimant was last employed as the executive director for the above-named employer from 6-08-05 to 7-25-07 when the claimant was informed that she had the choice to be fired from her employment or she could resign. The claim choice to [sic] to take an involuntary resignation.

There was no other reduction in employment at the company in the claimant's job classification at the time the claimant was separated from the work.

[(Emphasis added).]

The Tribunal continued:

N.J.S.A. 43:21-60 provides in part that additional benefits shall be provided [to] any individual who:

a. ". . . has received a notice of permanent termination of employment by the individual's employer or has been laid off and is unlikely to return to his previous employment because work opportunities in the individual's job classification are ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.