Plaintiff must prove the TWC’s decision is unreasonable, arbitrary, and capricious to overturn a denial of unemployment benefits.
Special contributing author Laura Mueller, City Attorney for Dripping Springs
Van Deelen v. Tex. Workforce Comm’n, No. 14-18-00489-CV (Tex. App.—Houston [14th] January 26, 2021) (mem. op.).
In this appeal from a trial court’s judgment granting the TWC’s summary judgment motion on an unemployment benefits case, the 14th Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment because there was substantial evidence of the plaintiff’s termination being caused by employment misconduct.
The plaintiff, a teacher, sued the Texas Workforce Commission and the School District (his employer) when he was denied unemployment benefits because his termination was for misconduct. The evidence presented was that the plaintiff was terminated from the school district for: (1) assault of a supervisor; (2) misconduct toward school staff and students; and (3) misrepresentation on his employment application. After the plaintiff was terminated, he applied for unemployment compensation from the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC). A TWC Appeal Tribunal held that the plaintiff was terminated for mismanagement of a position of employment and was therefore not entitled to unemployment compensation. The full TWC affirmed the decision of the tribunal. The plaintiff appealed to the trial court, which upheld the decision of TWC and rendered summary judgment for TWC and the school district. The plaintiff appealed.
Section 201.012 of the Texas Labor Code provides for denial of unemployment compensation by the Texas Workforce Commission if the employee is terminated for misconduct. The Court reviews a TWC unemployment compensation decision for whether the decision is based on substantial evidence. See Tex. Lab. Code § 212.202(a); McCrory v. Henderson, 431 S.W.3d 140, 142 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2013, no pet.). To reverse a decision of the TWC on unemployment benefits, the plaintiff has the burden to show that the TWC’s determination is not supported by substantial evidence. See Collingsworth Gen. Hosp. v. Hunnicutt, 988 S.W.2d 706, 708 (Tex. 1998). The primary issue is whether the evidence considered by the TWC reasonably supported the decision of the TWC, and the decision may only be overturned if the decision is unreasonable, arbitrary, and capricious. The Court of Appeals held that the evidence of misconduct was sufficient to uphold the TWC’s decision even though there was evidence contrary to the TWC’s decision.
If you would like to read this opinion click here. Panel consists of Justices Bourliot, Zimmerer, and Spain. Opinion by Justice Jerry Zimmerer.
