IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

BRITTANY BUTLER , ) ) Appellant, ) ) )
v. ) C.A. N o. N23A

- 06

- 009 JRJ

) STATE OF DELAWARE ) UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ) APPEAL BOARD , ) ) Appellee. )
Date Submitted: September 13 , 202 3 Date Decided: October 4 , 202 3

ORDER This 4 th day of October , upon appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board (“Board”), the parties’ briefs, and the record below, IT APPEARS
THAT: (1) Appellant Brittany Butler ( “ Butler ” ) appeals a decision of the Board

. 1
On February 5 , 202 3 , Butler filed a claim for unemployment insurance benefits with
the Department of Labor (“ DOL ”). 2 The Claims Deputy found Butler ineligible for
benefits because she was discharged for “just cause” 3 as defined under 19 Del. C. §

1 Butler Notice of Appeal, R4.; see also Notice of Appeal, Trans. ID 70229001 (June 21, 2023)

. 2 Notice of Determination , R 17 . Trans. ID 704 1 9579 (July 18, 2023)

. 3 Id. ; S ee Bouyer

- Bello v. Unemployment Ins

. Appeal Bd

. , 191 A.3d 1111 (Del. 2018) (holding

“ just cause ” is when an employee commits a “willful or wanton act or pattern of conduct in violation of the employer ’ s interest , the employee’s duties, or the employee’s standard of conduct.”) (internal citation omitted).2

3314 ( 2 ). 4 The Claims Deputy mailed the N otice of D etermination (“N OD ”) to
Butler on February 23, 2023

. 5 The N OD advised Butler that under 19 Del. C. § 3318(b) , she could appeal the decision within ten days but no later than March 6 , 202 3

. 6 Butler filed an appeal on March 7, 2023

. 7 (2) On March 7, 202 3 , the Senior Claims Deputy issued a Notice of Late
Determination , advising Butler that her appeal was untimely under 19 Del. C. § 3318(b). 8 The Notice of Late Determination stated that the Claims Deputy’s February 23, 2023 decision was final , but a hearing would be scheduled on “the issue of timeliness of the appeal.” 9 (3) On March 28 , 202 3 , Butler appeared before the Appeals Referee (“Referee”)

. 10 The Referee affirmed the decision of the Claims Deputy and found

“ Claimant’s request for an appeal was NOT TIMELY pursuant to the jurisdictional

4 Under 19 Del. C. § 3314(2), an individual i s disqualified for benefits:

For the week in which he was discharged from his work , for just cause in connection with his work , and for each week thereafter until he has been employed in each of 4 subsequent weeks (whether or not consecutive) and has earne d wages in covered employment equal to not less than 4 times the weekly benefit amount. 5 Notice of Determination, R17. 6 On the last page of the Claims Deputy’s Notice of Determination, there is a section en titled “Claimant and Employer Appeal Rights.” In that section, it s tate s in bold , “ [t] his determination becomes final on 3/5 /202 3 unless a written appeal is filed.” Id . However, pursuant to 19 Del. C. § 3318(b), because March 5, 2023, fell on a Sunday, Butler had until March 6, 20 23 , to fi le her appeal. 19 Del. C. § 3318(b). 7 Butler Appeal Request Notification , R 20 (emphasis in documentation)

. 8 Notice of Late Determination, R 21

. 9 Id

. 10 Referee’s Decision, R13.3

requirements of 19 Del. C. § 3318(b). ” 11 Butler appealed the Referee ’s decision to
the Board

. 12 (4) On May 24, 2023, t he Board held a R eview H earing and affirmed the
Referee ’s decision , subsequently denying Butler’s application for further review

. 13
The Board held that the Referee properly affirme d the Claims Deputy’s decision
because Butler failed “to provide any evidence of severe circumstances preventing [Butler] from filing her request to appeal the Claims Deputy Determination before the statutory deadline

. ” The Board further held , “[t]here was no evidence presented to indicate that any administrative errors or mistakes by the Department cause d Claimant to receive the Claims Deputy Determination late .” 14 F inding no error in
the Referee ’s decision or a failure of due process , the Boa rd declined to exercise its
discretion to accept Butler ’s appeal for further review. 15 Butler then appealed to the Superior Court. 16 (5) W hen reviewing a decision on appeal from the Board , the Superior Court plays a limited role

. The Court’s role on appeal is to determine whether the Board had substantial evidence to support its findings. 17 Conclusions of law are

11 Id

. 12 Butler Appeal Request Notification to Board, R 11

. 13 Id

. 14 Id. at 7. 15 Id. 16 Butler Notice of Appeal to Superior Ct., R 4

- 5

. 17 Gen. Motors Corp. v. Freeman , 164 A.2d 686, 689 (Del. 1960).4

reviewed de novo

. 18 The Court will review the Board’s discretionary rulings on an
abuse of discretion standard , 19 only disturbing its decisions where the Board “acts arbitrarily or capriciously, or exceeds the bounds of reason in view of the circumstances and has ignored recognized rules of law or practice so as to produce injustice.” 20 (6) Pursuant to 19 Del. C. § 3318(b) , a claimant has ten days from the date of mailing to appeal a decision of a Claims Deputy. “The time for filing an appeal is an express statutory condition of jurisdiction that is both mandatory and dispositive.” 21 Where the delay is not caused by an administrative erro r on the part of the Department, the decision of the Claims Deputy becomes final, and 19 Del. C. § 3318(b) creates a jurisdictional bar to further appellate review. 22 (7) Butler concedes her appeal was filed late

. 23 She argues her father “has the key for the mailbox. So [she] she did not receive [her] mail until Tuesday the
7 th ,” thus receiving the NOD late

. 24 U nder Delaware law, notice that is “correctly addressed, stamped and mailed is presumed to have been received by the party to
whom it was addressed.” 25 The N OD was mailed to Butler at her address of record

18 LeVan v. Indep. Mall, Inc. , 940 A.2d 929, 932 (Del. 2007). 19 Funk v. Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd. , 591 A.2d 222, 225 (Del. 1991). 20 Hartman v. Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd. , 2004 WL 772067, at *2 (Del. Super. Apr. 5, 2004). 21 Lively v. Dover Wipes Co

. , 2003 WL 21213415, at *1 (Del. Super. May 16, 2003) 22 Hartman , 2004 WL 772067, at *2

. 23 Butler’s Reply Br., Trans. ID 70830646 (Sept. 11, 2023). 24 Transcript of Referee’s Hearing, R34

- 35. 25 PAL of Wilmington v. Graham , 2008 WL 2582986, at *4 (Del. Super. June 18, 2008).5

with the DOL

. 26 Butler has not provided any evidence to suggest an error or wrongdoing on the part of the DOL

. (8) Under 19 Del. C. § 3320(a), the Board has broad discretion to consider an appeal and may , “on its own motion, affirm, modify, or reverse any decision of an appeal tribunal

. ” 27 H owever, in the context of “untimely appeals, such discretion is exercised rarely and primarily in cases of administrative error that has the effect of depriving a claimant the opportunity to file a timely appeal.” 28 (9) Here, the Board declined to exercise i ts discretion to hear Butler ’s appeal on the merits because Butler failed to provide “ any evidence of severe circumstances which would call for tolling the 10

- day appeal timeline

. ” 29 (10) The Court finds that the Board’s decision to affirm the Referee ’s
decision is supported by substantial evidence and free from legal error

. Further, the Board did not abuse its discretion when it declined to accept the appeal for review.
THEREFORE , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appe al Board is AFFIRMED

.

26 Mailing Address Cert., R18. 27 19 Del. C. § 3320(a). 28 Hefley v. Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd. , 988 A.2d 937 (Del. Jan. 26, 2010) (TABLE) (citing Funk v. Unemployment Ins. Appeal Bd. , 591 A.2d 222, 225 (Del. 1991)) (emphasis added). 29 Board Decision, R6

- 8.6

IT IS SO ORDERED

.

/s/ Jan R. Jurden Jan R. Jurden, President Judg e
cc: Prot h onotary