Opinion

Hass v. Employment Department

  • 244 Or. App. 131
  • 258 P.3d 1287
  • 2011 Ore. App. LEXIS 924
Court
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Filed
Jun 29, 2011
Status
Published
On the bench
Ortega, Sercombe, Rosenblum
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 26.2%

The opinion

*132

PER CURIAM

Claimant seeks judicial review of a final order of the Employment Appeals Board (EAB). After the Employment Department denied her claim for benefits, claimant failed to submit a request for hearing within the 20 days provided by ORS 657.269; she submitted her request for hearing three days late. After a hearing, the administrative law judge (ALJ) concluded that claimant had not demonstrated good cause to extend the 20-day deadline and, therefore, dismissed her request for hearing.

See

ORS 657.875 (“The period within which an interested party may request a hearing * * * may be extended, upon a showing of good cause therefor, a reasonable time under the circumstances of each particular case.”). Thereafter, claimant appealed to the EAB and also provided some additional materials relating to the issue of good cause. The EAB affirmed the AJL’s decision “without opinion.”

As we recently explained in

Opp v. Employment

Dept., 242 Or App 673, 676 , 259 P3d 15 (2011), when the EAB affirms an ALJ without opinion, and without adopting the findings and conclusions of the ALJ,

“ipso facto

its order cannot be supported by substantial reason.”

See also

ORS 657.275(2) (board may enter findings and conclusions or adopt findings and conclusions of the ALJ). Such an order is insufficient as a matter of law, and we must, therefore, remand the case to the EAB for it to make findings and set forth its conclusions.

See Opp,

242 Or App at 676 . In addition, we note that claimant submitted additional information to the board with her appeal and if, on remand, the “board finds that additional evidence is required to reach a decision, it may remand the matter to the administrative law judge * * * to obtain additional evidence in the matter.” ORS 657.275(1).

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.