|
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND RELEASED AUGUST 13, 1996 |
NOTICE |
|
A party may file with the
Supreme Court a petition to review an adverse decision by the Court of
Appeals. See § 808.10 and
Rule 809.62, Stats. |
This opinion is subject to
further editing. If published, the
official version will appear in the bound volume of the Official Reports. |
No. 96-0864-FT
STATE
OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF
APPEALS
DISTRICT III
PETER J. KAIRIS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
v.
STATE OF WISCONSIN
LABOR
AND INDUSTRY REVIEW
COMMISSION and
LAKELAND
AIRPORT COMMISSION,
Respondents-Respondents.
APPEAL from a judgment
of the circuit court for Oneida County:
ROBERT E. KINNEY, Judge. Affirmed.
Before Cane, P.J.,
LaRocque and Myse, JJ.
PER
CURIAM. Peter Kairis appeals a judgment affirming a decision
of the Labor and Industry Review Commission dismissing his claim for
unemployment compensation benefits.[1] Kairis arrived late for a hearing before an
appeal tribunal and LIRC concluded that Kairis did not establish good cause for
his late appearance. We affirm the
judgment that affirmed LIRC's decision.
Kairis received
notification that a hearing was scheduled for 12 noon on April 10, 1995. The notice included a box warning that if he
was late, the hearing could be dismissed.
Kairis was delayed "a couple of minutes" at a train crossing and
arrived at the building after noon. He
saw his employer's representatives seated in a room when he arrived, but did
not enter that room, apparently because he was uncomfortable being in the same
room with his former employers and because he believed it was a waiting room
for witnesses. On the glass doors,
under the words "Internal Revenue Service" was a printed sign stating
"Unemployment Compensation Appeal Hearing." Instead, Kairis went to the Unemployment Compensation Office
desk, which he knew from previous experience would not be manned during the
noon hour. There he saw another door that
had a metal "Restroom" sign on it and a handwritten "Appeal
Hearings" sign. A photographic
exhibit of the door with a glass window suggests that it is an entryway to a
foyer that connects to handicapped-accessible restrooms and possibly other
rooms. Kairis waited at the desk for four or five minutes before he began to
look for the hearing room. By the time
Kairis found the correct hearing room, the administrative law judge had excused
the employer's representatives and dismissed Kairis' claim.
LIRC found that a
reasonably prudent person would not have acted as Kairis did. The legal question, whether Kairis has
established good cause for his failure to timely appear, is intertwined with
factual determinations and with value or policy determinations. Therefore, LIRC's conclusions are entitled to
deference by the court. See Sauk
County v. WERC, 165 Wis.2d 406, 413, 477 N.W.2d 267, 270 (1991). LIRC's actions are specifically authorized
by §§ 108.09(4)(c) and (i), Stats.,
and Wis. Adm. Code §§ IHLR 40.14 and 40.15.
LIRC's decision that
Kairis did not establish good cause for his failure to appear is supported by
the evidence. Kairis left very little
margin for error. With no excuse other
than a short train delay, something that is hardly an unforeseeable event, he
arrived late, disregarded signs that LIRC found to be adequate, unreasonably
hesitated to enter rooms marked with appropriate signs or containing people he
did not wish to see and waited at a desk that he knew was unmanned for four or
five minutes before attempting to find the correct room. He found the correct room in less than one
minute after he decided to search for it.
Under these circumstances, LIRC was entitled to draw an unfavorable
inference and decide that a reasonable person would have arrived at the hearing
room before the employer's representatives were excused.
By the Court.—Judgment
affirmed.
This opinion will not be
published. See Rule 809.23(1)(b)5, Stats.