Opinion ID: 1610173
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: whether the employer, sheriff richard rip stringer, failed to show good cause for his failure to timely file an appeal to the board of review pursuant to miss. code ann. section 71-5-519 (1972, as amended).

Text: ¶ 10. MESC contends that the Sheriff's Department failed to show good cause for its failure to timely file an appeal and that the decision of the Board of Review should be affirmed. The fourteen day time period may be relaxed or extended if there is a showing of good cause by the appellant that the mailing to the last known address was not reasonably calculated, under all circumstances, to apprise the party of the decision. Booth v. Miss. Employment Sec. Comm'n, 588 So.2d 422 (Miss.1991) Cane v. Miss. Employment Sec. Comm'n, 368 So.2d 1263 (Miss.1979); Holt v. Miss. Employment Sec. Comm'n, 724 So.2d 466 (Miss.Ct.App.1998). Good cause is established when there is sufficient evidence to show that a party failed to receive the mailing due to delays in the mail or because of an act beyond the party's control. Moreover, there is a presumption that the majority of mail is delivered on a timely basis. Mere denial that the notice was received, without supporting evidence, fails to constitute good cause for failing to timely appeal. Id. Thus, the Sheriff's Department failed to show good cause for its failure to timely appeal.
¶ 11. As stated in Miss.Code Ann. § 71-5-531 (Rev.2000), judicial review by the circuit court is confined to questions of law. Thus, absent fraud, the court should accept the Commission's findings of fact as conclusive if supported by the evidence. ¶ 12. According to MESC, no testimony was taken during the December 13, 2001, telephonic hearing because the Sheriff's Department was not in attendance. Thus, the decision of the Appeals Referee concluded that the burden of proof ... was not met by the employer and misconduct has not been established. The disqualification, therefore, is not in order. Under our statutory scheme, [t]he burden of proof of good cause for leaving work shall be on the claimant, and the burden of proof of misconduct shall be on the employer. Miss.Code Ann. § 71-5-513(A)(c) (Rev. 2000) (emphasis added). In addition, this Court has held that in an unemployment benefits proceeding, [t]he burden of proving this disqualifying misconduct by clear and convincing evidence rests with the employer. Southwood Door Co. v. Burton, 847 So.2d 833, 841 (Miss.2003). Hence, the decision of the Appeals Referee was appropriate under the facts and circumstances before him at the time of the hearing. The appropriate time to address the issue of Notice of the Telephone Hearing was in a timely appeal of the Referee's decision. ¶ 13. Pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 71-5-519 the decision of the Appeals Referee became final on the expiration of the fourteen-day deadline, and absent a showing of good cause this decision was conclusive. Miss. Employment Sec. Comm'n v. Edwards, 763 So.2d 194, 196 (Miss.Ct.App. 2000). The Sheriff's Department failed to provided any evidence to support a showing of good cause for its failure to timely appeal to the Board of Review. The circuit court should have addressed this appeal strictly on the undisputed fact that the Sheriff Department's appeal was untimely. The circuit court committed reversible error by substituting its opinion for that of the Board of Review by addressing the merits of an untimely appeal.