Jones v. Industrial Com'n, 84CA0398
| Decision Date | 03 July 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 84CA0398,84CA0398 |
| Citation | 705 P.2d 530 |
| Parties | Marcia JONES, Petitioner, v. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION of the State of Colorado, and City and County of Denver, Respondents. . I |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
Marcia Jones, pro se.
Duane Woodard, Atty. Gen., Charles B. Howe, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Richard H. Forman, Sol. Gen., Mary Karen Maldonado, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for respondent Indus. Com'n.
Stephen H. Kaplan, City Atty., Dianne E. Eret, Asst. City Atty., Denver, for respondent City and County of Denver.
Claimant, Marcia Jones, seeks review of a final order of the Industrial Commission reducing her unemployment compensation benefits by twenty weeks because of her refusal to accept a referral to suitable employment, and determining that she had received an overpayment of benefits. See § 8-73-108(5)(a), C.R.S. (1984 Cum.Supp.). We affirm.
Claimant quit her employment with the City and County of Denver (city) as an admissions clerk at Denver General Hospital in order to accept a better job with the federal government. After her position with the federal government was eliminated in a work force reduction, she filed a claim for unemployment benefits based on her employment with the city, and was awarded full unemployment compensation benefits. When the city received notice of this, it sent claimant a letter requesting her to contact the Career Service Authority about employment. Claimant contacted the city, but when told that her former position was available, stated that she was not interested in it.
The Commission found that claimant had quit her job with the city to accept a better job. It further found that although "no actual offer of employment or referral was made," claimant had refused a referral to suitable employment when she indicated that she was not interested in her former position. The Commission therefore disqualified claimant from the receipt of benefits paid after the refusal, and found that she had thus been overpaid those benefits which she had received after that date.
Claimant contends that the statement that no offer of employment or referral was made precludes the application of the disqualifying provisions of the statutory subsection now codified as § 8-73-108(5)(d), C.R.S. (1984 Cum.Supp.). We disagree.
The statute provides for a reduced award when a claimant refuses a referral to suitable work. Although the Commission found that the city had not made an actual referral, it is clear from the order that it found that claimant had been referred to employment which she refused because of claimant's desire not to return to work with the same supervisor. Because the Commission is not held to a "crystalline standard" in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ward v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of State of Colo., 94CA1628
...evidence and the permissible inferences which may be drawn therefrom, and we thus may not disturb it. See Jones v. Industrial Commission, 705 P.2d 530 (Colo.App.1985); McGinn v. Industrial Commission, 31 Colo.App. 6, 496 P.2d 1080 Furthermore, the hearing officer's evidentiary findings are ......
-
Keil v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office
...These findings, supported by substantial, although sometimes conflicting evidence, may not be disturbed on review. Jones v. Industrial Commission, 705 P.2d 530 (Colo.App.1985). The findings support the conclusion that claimant deliberately disobeyed a reasonable instruction of employer, and......
-
Hart v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of State of Colo., 94CA1714
...1127 (Colo.App.1990); Southwest Forest Industries, Inc. v. Industrial Commission, 719 P.2d 1098 (Colo.App.1986); Jones v. Industrial Commission, 705 P.2d 530 (Colo.App.1985). IV. We decline to consider claimant's argument that the hearing officer erred in indefinitely suspending collection ......
-
Velo v. Employment Solutions Personnel
...he separated from employment with ESP and filed his claim for unemployment benefits was an eligibility issue. See Jones v. Industrial Commission, 705 P.2d 530 (Colo.App.1985); Romero v. Industrial Commission, 616 P.2d 992 (Colo. App.1980). This eligibility issue is moot, however unless and ......