( Taylor )
( Tulsa County - Jane P. Wiseman )
Thomas L. Bright Tulsa, Oklahoma For Appellant
Cara S. Nicklas Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Stephen L. Andrew D. Kevin Ikenberry Stephen L. Andrew & Associates Tulsa, Oklahoma For Appellee NORDAM
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Plaintiff Curtis D. Schmeling appeals the trial court's judgment affirming Defendant Board of Review of the Oklahoma Employment Security Commission's (OESC) denial of unemployment compensation benefits. Based on the record and applicable law, we affirm.
The facts are not in dispute. Schmeling was fired by his employer, NORDAM. He filed for unemployment benefits. OESC disallowed benefits, finding he had been discharged for misconduct. OESC mailed its notice of determination to Schmeling on January 3, 1995, stating that if he disagreed with its decision, "You may file an appeal within ten (10) days of the mailing date of this form.
Schmeling did not file an appeal until January 17, or four days after the ten-day period expired. An OESC hearing examiner found Schmeling failed to show good cause for filing out of time, and accordingly dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction. OESC's Board of Review affirmed. Schmeling filed a petition for judicial review in district court against OESC, the Board, and NORDAM. The trial court denied Schmeling's petition, finding that OESC and its Board did not abuse their discretion in determining that Schmeling did not show good cause for the late filing of his appeal. Schmeling appeals.
In considering a petition for review from an OESC Board of Review decision, the findings of the Board as to the facts, if supported by evidence, shall be conclusive and the jurisdiction of the trial court shall be confined to questions of law.