STANLEY F. JURACKA Appellant,
UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE APPEAL BOARD, Appellee.
Submitted: April 1, 2019
Consideration of Appellant's Appeal from the Decision of
the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board - AFFIRMED
JEFFREV J. CLARK JUDGE.
11th day of April, 2019, having considered the
briefs and the record in this case, it appears that:
Appellant Stanley F. Juracka (hereinafter "Mr.
Juracka") appeals a decision from an Unemployment
Insurance Appeal Board's (hereinafter "UIAB")
finding that he fraudulently collected unemployment benefits,
and the UIAB's order that he repay $1, 650.
Juracka filed for unemployment on December 4, 2016, and then
received weekly benefits of $330. After a wage audit
investigation, the Delaware Division of Unemployment
Insurance ("the Division") found that Mr. Juracka
underreported the wages paid to him by his employer while he
March 26, 2018, a Division claims deputy found Mr. Juracka to
be disqualified pursuant to 19 Del. C. §
3314(6) from receiving benefits for one year from the week
ending July 15, 2017, through the week ending July 14, 2018.
The claims deputy found that Mr. Juracka knowingly failed to
disclose a material fact to unlawfully obtain benefits. The
record supports that the claims deputy mailed Mr. Juracka a
copy of the disqualification determination on March 26, 2018.
He did not appeal the disqualification determination and it
became final on April 5, 2018.
After the disqualification decision became final,
the Division began separate administrative proceedings to
establish the overpayment amounts and to recoup
them.After a hearing on June 25, 2018, a
Division claims deputy issued an overpayment determination in
accordance with 19 Del. C. § 3325 and ordered
Mr. Juracka to repay $1, 650.
a hearing on September 18, 2018, a Division appeals referee
issued her decision affirming the claims deputy's
decision. Because Mr. Juracka had not appealed the earlier
decision that he was disqualified for benefits for the entire
relevant year, the appeals referee limited her decision to
calculating the amount of repayment owed for the five weeks
at issue. She found Mr. Juracka liable to repay $1, 650 in
benefits paid to him between July 15, 2017, and December 9,
2017. Mr. Juracka appealed the appeal's referee's
decision to the UIAB, and the UIAB affirmed her decision. His
appeal to this Court followed.
Juracka primarily contests the UIAB's finding that he was
disqualified for benefits during the relevant time. As a
result, he also appeals the UIAB's overpayment
determination. In his letter brief, he argues that he
followed all applicable rules and that the appeals referee
erred in ordering a repayment. In essence, Mr. Juracka
attempts to challenge the merits of the earlier decision that
he was disqualified for benefits.
Court's appellate review of the UIAB's factual
findings is limited to determining whether the Board's
decision was supported by substantial evidence and whether it
committed an error of law. Substantial evidence means "such
relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to support a conclusion." On appeal, the
Court views the facts in the light most favorable to the
prevailing party below. Moreover, the Court does not weigh the
evidence, determine questions of credibility, or make its own
factual findings. Absent errors oflaw, which are reviewed
de novo, a decision of the UIAB supported by
substantial evidence will be upheld unless the Board abused
its discretion. The Board abuses its discretion when its
decision exceeds the bounds of reason in view of the
Section 3318(b) of Title 19 of the Delaware Code provides
that a claims deputy's determination becomes final unless
a claimant for unemployment benefits appeals the
determination within ten calendar days from when the decision
was "mailed to the last know addresses of the claimant
and the last employer." The Board may consider an
untimely appeal only if "the lateness of the filing can
be traced back to an error of the UIAB, or 'in those
cases where the interests ofjustice would not be served by
this case, the record includes an affidavit of mailing
demonstrating that the claims deputy mailed the relevant
disqualification decision to Mr. Juracka on March 26, 2018.
In his Superior Court appeal, Mr. Juracka does not address
timeliness or request an excusal for missing the appeal
timeline. Nevertheless, the appeals referee transcript,
relied upon by the UIAB, demonstrates that Mr. Juracka
claimed during the later appeals referee hearing of September
18, 2018 that he did not receive the earlier decision
There is a presumption in Delaware that "a mailing with
a proper address and postage has been received by the
intended claimant." Mr. Juracka does not allege in this
appeal that Division employees made a mistake or that they
did not mail the notice to his correct address of record. To
the contrary, the record contains substantial evidence
demonstrating that the claims deputy mailed the
disqualification determination to Mr. Juracka at the same
address used to contact him throughout the proceedings below.