Kuprashuk v Greyhound Lines
Digest no. 8.01
Cite as: Kuprashuk v Greyhound Lines, No. 83-334785-AE, unpublished opinion of the Wayne Circuit Court (November 2, 1984).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Helen V. Kuprashuk
Employer: Greyhound Lines
Docket no.: B82 02234 82880
Date of decision: November 2, 1984
View/download the full decision
CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: Waiting for the employer to respond to a union grievance and unfamiliarity with Commission filing procedures do not constitute good cause for late filing.
FACTS: The claimant filed her claim late because she had initiated steps to return to her job by filing a grievance which the employer failed to answer immediately and because of unfamiliarity with the Commission filing procedures.
DECISION: The claimant did not have good cause for late filing.
RATIONALE: The Court adopted the decision of the Referee, as affirmed by the Board, which held that “[T]he reasons for [claimant’s] late filing were not contained in Rule 210(2) of the Administrative Rules of the Commission … and in addition, the fact that the claimant alleges unfamiliarity with the Act, and the fact that claimant was waiting for a response to her union grievance, do not constitute justifiable reasons for failing to file a timely claim.”
Digest Author: Board of Review (original digest here)
Digest Updated: 6/91