Preview:

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT John R. Maley Kristin S. Shedlock Indianapolis, Indiana

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES Steve Carter Attorney General of Indiana Thomas M. Fisher Solicitor General Elizabeth Rogers Heather L. Hagan Deputy Attorneys General Indianapolis, Indiana

In the

Jun 17 2008, 2:54 pm

FILED
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

Indiana Supreme Court
_________________________________
No. 93S02-0801-EX-17 INDIANA STATE UNIVERSITY,

CLERK

Appellant (Respondent Below), v. WILLIAM C. LAFIEF AND INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT [REVIEW BOARD],

Appellees (Claimants Below).

_________________________________
Appeal from the Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development, No. 06-R-2956 Steven F. Bier, Chairperson _________________________________ On Petition To Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 93A02-0611-EX-1012

_________________________________
June 17, 2008 Shepard, Chief Justice. The issue is whether a university professor who agreed to a fixed-term employment contract was entitled to unemployment benefits upon the non-renewal of his contract. We hold that the professor was not voluntarily unemployed and is entitled to benefits.

Facts and Procedural History

Indiana State University appointed William LaFief to a position as an assistant professor in accordance with the University's practice of employing assistant professors for one-year probationary terms with annual reviews that result in reappointment or non-reappointment for subsequent terms. LaFief was initially appointed for the 2004-05 academic year and was

reappointed for 2005-06. Thereafter, ISU notified LaFief that he would not be reappointed.

LaFief filed for unemployment. An administrative law judge held that he was not entitled to unemployment benefits, reasoning that LaFief was not "discharged" because his employment ended at the expiration of his contract term. The Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development reversed, finding that ISU's decision not to reappoint LaFief equated to a "discharge." (App. at 14-16.)

The Court of Appeals reversed the board, holding that LaFief was not entitled to unemployment benefits because he had voluntarily agreed to a one-year appointment that expired by its own terms and that he was not "discharged" from his employment when he was not reappointed. Ind. State Univ. v. Review Bd. of the Ind. Dep't of Workforce Dev., 868 N.E.2d 839 (Ind. Ct. App. 2007). We granted transfer.

LaFief Was Not Voluntarily Unemployed

The Unemployment Compensation Act (UCA), Ind. Code art. 22-4, was enacted to "provide for payment of benefits to persons unemployed through no fault of their own." Ind. Code Ann.

Download Indiana State University v. William LaFief, et al.pdf

Indiana Law