James v. Illinois Dept. of Labor

• Decision Date: 15 November 1983
• Docket Number: No. 82-948,82-948
• Citation: 119 Ill.App.3d 524,75 Ill.Dec. 58,456 N.E.2d 879
• Parties: , 75 Ill.Dec. 58, 14 Ed. Law Rep. 1049 Sonja I. JAMES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; Board of Review; E. Allen Bernardi, Director of the Board of Review; Bruce W. Barnes, Member; Eugene E. Christy, Member; Davide W. Tomei, Member, Defendants-Appellants.
• Court: United States Appellate Court of Illinois

Page 879

456 N.E.2d 879

119 Ill.App.3d 524, 75 Ill.Dec. 58,

14 Ed. Law Rep. 1049

Sonja I. JAMES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; Board of Review; E. Allen

Bernardi, Director of the Board of Review; Bruce W. Barnes,

Member; Eugene E. Christy, Member; Davide W. Tomei,

Member, Defendants-Appellants.

No. 82-948.

Appellate Court of Illinois,

Second District.

Nov. 15, 1983.

Neil Hartigan, Atty. Gen., Leslie J. Rosen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Chicago, for defendants-appellants.

Georges & Herdrich, Roger C. Herdrich, Naperville, for plaintiff-appellee.

NASH, Justice:

Defendants, the Illinois Department of Labor and its Board of Review, appeal from a judgment of the circuit court which, on administrative review, reversed the decision of the Board that plaintiff, Sonja James, was ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits. Defendants contend that the determination of the Board that plaintiff's principal occupation was as a student, thus disqualifying her from benefits, was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.

Plaintiff was employed by the Associates in Adolescent Psychiatry, S.C. (Associates) from April 1977 until December 9, 1980, when she was discharged. Plaintiff's claim for unemployment insurance benefits for the period December 14 through December 27, 1980, was denied by a claims adjudicator on the grounds she was ineligible under section 500 of the Unemployment Insurance Act (Ill.Rev.Stat.1981, ch. 48, par. 420(C)(4)) as her principal occupation was as a student. Plaintiff appealed from that determination and, after a hearing, a department referee reached the same conclusion. On further appeal to the Board of Review of the Department of Labor the decision of the referee was affirmed. On administrative review, however, the circuit court reversed the decision of the Board of Review and defendants appeal to this court.

We find that the decision of the Board of Review was not against the manifest weight of the evidence considered by it and reverse the judgment of the circuit court.

Section 500 of the Unemployment Insurance Act provides:

"An individual shall be deemed unavailable for work with respect to any week which occurs in a period when his principal occupation is that of a student in attendance at, or on vacation from, a public or private school." Ill.Rev.Stat.1981, ch. 48, par. 420(C)(4).

The evidence disclosed that plaintiff had been employed by Associates as a psychological consultant for three and one-half years prior to her discharge. In September 1979, she executed an employment agreement which provided she would work 20 hours each week for an annual salary of $12,437.50. The agreement also required plaintiff to enter a full-time program of study leading to a doctoral degree in psychology and thus eligible to become a registered psychologist in this state. By December 9, 1980, when she was discharged, plaintiff had completed one and one-third years of doctoral studies with the Illinois School of Professional Psychology and her annual salary with Associates had increased to $14,000.

For her salary, plaintiff testified she spent six hours each week in the Associates' offices during which she conducted psychological tests. She also spent approximately ten hours each week in her own home evaluating the results of the tests and an additional three to five hours per week counseling clients on an outpatient basis. In all, approximately 16 to 20 hours each week was directed towards plaintiff's employment with Associates.

During the weeks for which benefits were sought, plaintiff was on vacation between semesters of her educational program. In the fall semester of 1980, preceding her discharge, plaintiff was enrolled in three courses in her doctoral studies (the school considered four courses to be full-time enrollment), which required her to attend class for three hours on two evenings each week. She was also required to undertake an on-the-job clinical training program in a Chicago hospital from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. each Monday and Wednesday. In addition to the 18-20 hours in which she attended class and engaged in on-the-job training at the hospital, plaintiff spent 6 to 8 hours each week studying for her educational program; the necessary study periods extended to 6 hours each Saturday and Sunday towards the end of a term. Following the between semesters break, plaintiff resumed her studies in January 1980 on the same educational program and time schedule. After being discharged from Associates, plaintiff talked to a couple of psychiatrists and the operator of the treatment center regarding employment.

Plaintiff advised the claims adjudicator she was a full-time student; that her employment must be flexible in order to accommodate the requirements of her educational program; and, that her former employer had required that she go to school on a full-time basis and work half-time. Before the referee, plaintiff testified that she needed a doctorate in order to get a better job in her profession.

In Illinois, the receipt of unemployment insurance benefits is a conditional right and the...