Preview:

REL:

12/07/2012

Notice: T h i s o p i n i o n i s s u b j e c t t o formal r e v i s i o n b e f o r e p u b l i c a t i o n i n t h e advance s h e e t s o f Southern R e p o r t e r . R e a d e r s a r e r e q u e s t e d t o n o t i f y t h e R e p o r t e r o f D e c i s i o n s , Alabama A p p e l l a t e C o u r t s , 300 D e x t e r A v e n u e , M o n t g o m e r y , A l a b a m a 3 6 1 0 4 - 3 7 4 1 ((334) 2 2 9 - 0 6 4 9 ) , o f a n y t y p o g r a p h i c a l o r o t h e r e r r o r s , i n o r d e r t h a t c o r r e c t i o n s may b e made b e f o r e t h e o p i n i o n i s p r i n t e d i n Southern R e p o r t e r .

ALABAMA COURT OF CIVIL APPEALS
OCTOBER TERM, 2012-2013

2110467 Alabama Department o f I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s v. Tonya F r a z i e r Appeal from Mobile C i r c u i t (CV-09-001220) PITTMAN, J u d g e . The Alabama Department o f I n d u s t r i a l from R e l a t i o n s ("the Circuit

Court

Department") Court

appeals

a judgment o f t h e M o b i l e i n so f a r as i t s e t s

('the t r i a l

court")

aside the

Department's order

r e q u i r i n g Tonya F r a z i e r t o r e i m b u r s e t h e

2110467 D e p a r t m e n t f o r an o v e r p a y m e n t o f employment c o m p e n s a t i o n . reverse and remand. sought unemployment compensation after Before We

Frazier

v o l u n t a r i l y l e a v i n g her job at a f a s t - f o o d restaurant. the Department i s s u e d a final ruling

on t h e m a t t e r , F r a z i e r

r e c e i v e d $2,421 i n unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n . The D e p a r t m e n t initially denied Frazier's appealed request from a for that final unemployment and,

compensation. eventually,

Frazier the

decision,

Department

issued

administrative

r u l i n g d e n y i n g F r a z i e r ' s r e q u e s t f o r unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n and o r d e r i n g F r a z i e r t o r e i m b u r s e t h e $2,421 p r e v i o u s l y paid

to her. Having exhausted her a d m i n i s t r a t i v e remedies, F r a z i e r thereafter appealed to the t r i a l court. In October 2011, court

following a t r i a l

on t h e m e r i t s

of the case, the t r i a l

e n t e r e d a judgment a f f i r m i n g t h e Department's d e c i s i o n d e n y i n g F r a z i e r ' s r e q u e s t f o r unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n , b u t i t r u l e d t h a t t h e $2,421 i n p a y m e n t s p r e v i o u s l y made was n o t due t o be repaid filed t o t h e D e p a r t m e n t . I n November a postjudgment motion that to amend 2011, t h e D e p a r t m e n t the trial court's

judgment t o t h e e x t e n t

i t had n o t r e q u i r e d

Frazier to already

r e p a y t h e $2,421 i n unemployment c o m p e n s a t i o n she h a d

2

2110467 r e c e i v e d . F o l l o w i n g the t r i a l c o u r t ' s d e n i a l of t h a t motion i n J a n u a r y 2012, The on appeal the Department appealed. and the s o l e i s s u e i n d e c l i n i n g to in unemployment

f a c t s of the case are u n d i s p u t e d , i s whether Frazier to the trial court

erred

require

repay

the

$2,421

c o m p e n s a t i o n p a i d t o h e r . We, the t r i a l

t h e r e f o r e , "'must d e t e r m i n e i f facts'";

c o u r t m i s a p p l i e d the law t o the u n d i s p u t e d

t h u s , " ' t h e s t a n d a r d o f r e v i e w i s de n o v o , ' " and we trial

a f f o r d the

c o u r t ' s j u d g m e n t no p r e s u m p t i o n o f c o r r e c t n e s s . A l a b a m a 11 So. 3d 858, 859-60 v. see 382 1215

Dep't o f Revenue v. J i m Beam B r a n d s Co., (Ala. Civ. App. 2008) (quoting 855 So. Bean 2d

Dredging, 513 812

L.L.C.

A l a b a m a Dep't o f also (Ala. (Ala. State

Revenue,

(Ala. 2003)); So. 2d So. 380, 2d

Dep't o f Revenue v. 2 0 0 1 ) , and

Garner,

C i v . App. 1997). The

Ex p a r t e

Graham, 702

Department authority order

argues to

that set

the

trial that In

court

lacked of of

the the that

statutory

aside

portion support

Department's

r e q u i r i n g repayment.

argument, the Department argues t h a t the t r i a l was c o n t r a r y t o A l a . Code 1975, "(1) Any benefits

court's action

Download 2110467.pdf

Alabama Law