Preview:

Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D), this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or the law of the case. ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT: JAMIE ANDREE STEVEN R. SHARPE Indiana Legal Services, Inc. Bloomington, Indiana

FILED
Jun 24 2008, 9:07 am
of the supreme court, court of appeals and tax court

CLERK

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE, Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development: STEVECARTER Attorney General of Indiana ELIZABETH ROGERS Deputy Attorney General Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE, Southern Enterprises, Inc. KEVIN A. HALLORAN Bunger & Robertson Bloomington, Indiana

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
LISA D. TATE, Appellant, vs. REVIEW BOARD OF THE INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT and SOUTHERN ENTERPRISES, INC., Appellees. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 93A02-0802-EX-108

APPEAL FROM THE REVIEW BOARD OF THE DEPARTMENT OF WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT The Honorable Steven F. Bier, Chairperson The Honorable George H. Baker, Member The Honorable Lawrence A. Dailey, Member Cause No. 07-R-2827

June 24, 2008 MEMORANDUM DECISION - NOT FOR PUBLICATION

BARNES, Judge

Case Summary Lisa Tate appeals the decision of the Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development (the "Board") denying her claim for unemployment benefits. We affirm. Issue Tate presents one issue for review, which we restate as whether the Board's determination that she quit her job without good cause is reasonable in light of its findings. Facts Tate worked at Southern Enterprises from June 2004, until August 8, 2007. Southern Enterprises is a franchise of Servpro, Inc. Greg and Lynn Southern owned and

2

operated the franchise. 1

Tate complained that the couple would have disruptive

arguments with each other during the workday, which often would then involve her. Tate also complained that the Southerns brought their dogs and their grandson to work, and she would have to care for the animals and child. Tate was required to clock in and out for smoking breaks. The Southerns had at times instructed Tate to tell creditors that certain checks had been issued when Tate knew those checks would not be timely mailed because of insufficient funds. Tate also believed her employer was in violation of its franchise agreement regarding vehicle painting and intentionally hid such violations from franchise representatives. After a confrontation with Lynn Southern regarding Tate's failure to clock out when she left the office to make a call and smoke, Tate quit. Tate applied for unemployment benefits and a claims deputy determined that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause and denied the application on September 17, 2007. She appealed that determination and an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") held a hearing on October 31, 2007. The ALJ reversed the decision of the deputy, concluding that Tate left her employment with good cause in connection with the work. The ALJ concluded that the fact that the Southerns argued and involved Tate in their arguments was a condition that would cause a reasonable person to feel compelled to quit. The ALJ also concluded the fact that Tate was instructed by the owners to intentionally mislead creditors was good cause for her to voluntarily terminate her employment. The ALJ found that Tate's other complaints did not constitute good cause.

Greg Southern is related to Tate's husband and the Southerns work with and/or sponsor Tate's husband's racing team.

1

3

Southern Enterprises appealed the ALJ's determination to the Board. The Board found that "while her working conditions were not entirely to her liking, they were not so unreasonable that they constituted good cause for leaving her employment" and reversed the decision of the ALJ. Appellant's App. p. 4. This appeal followed. Analysis Tate contends that the Board's conclusion of ultimate fact--that she did not have good cause to quit--is unreasonable and erroneous in light of its findings. "Any decision of the review board shall be conclusive and binding as to all questions of fact." Ind. Code

Download Lisa D. Tate v. Review Board of the Indiana Department. of Workforce Development

Indiana Law