0029 1195 45 (June 27, 2019) – Claimant, who decided not to attend an approved training program because she was pursuing a job, did not have good cause for filing a second Section 30 application after exhausting regular benefits without securing employment. Nor did she establish that her education and work experience in the field of marketing were inadequate to find work, or that her chosen aesthetician program was necessary for her to obtain suitable employment. Hearing examiner is not limited to the specific grounds for disqualification stated in the DUA determination.
0002 4851 05 (Feb. 26, 2015) – De Novo order was a ruling of law that derives from the Board's authority under G.L. c. 151A, § 41, and it did not violate the claimant's due process rights. All unrepresented parties are entitled to assistance from the review examiner. [Note: the District Court affirmed the Board of Review.]
0002 1706 42 (Oct. 8, 2013) – Permitting a non-party’s legal representative to introduce additional testimony and evidence was improper, but harmless, where it consumed less than two minutes in a 40-minute hearing and did not elicit any new material evidence.