This opinion will be unpublished and

may not be cited except as provided by

Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2000).

 

 

STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN COURT OF APPEALS

C4-01-2025

 

 

Mark S. Schwerzler,

Relator,

 

vs.

 

Cortec Corp.,

Respondent,

 

Commissioner of Economic Security,

Respondent.

 

Filed May 7, 2002

Affirmed

Robert H. Schumacher, Judge

 

Department of Economic Security

File No. 630901

 

 

Mark S. Schwerzler, 217 Nebraska Avenue West, Apartment 105, St. Paul, MN 55117 (pro se relator)

 

Cortec Corporation, c/o Automatic Data Processing, Post Office Box 6501-8501, Diamond Bar, CA 91765 (respondent)

 

Philip B. Byrne, Department of Economic Security, 390 North Robert Street, St. Paul, MN 55101 (for respondent Commissioner of Economic Security)

 

 

Considered and decided by Schumacher, Presiding Judge, Toussaint, Chief Judge, and Peterson, Judge.

U N P U B L I S H E D O P I N I O N

ROBERT H. SCHUMACHER, Judge

Relator Mark S. Schwerzler appeals from the decision of the commissioner's representative affirming the determination of the unemployment law judge that Schwerzler was disqualified from receiving benefits because he quit his employment with respondent Cortec Corp. for other than good reason caused by the employer. We affirm.

FACTS

Schwerzler was employed with Cortec from January 2, 2001, to May 4, 2001. On May 4, 2001, Schwerzler's supervisor for that day directed him as to his work assignment. Schwerzler disagreed with the supervisor and refused to do the work as directed.

Schwerzler and the supervisor met with the production manager regarding this disagreement. The production manager informed Schwerzler that the supervisor's instructions should be followed. Schwerzler then stated, "If that's the way it is, then I don't want to work here anymore," and left Cortec.

Schwerzler applied for unemployment benefits and was initially approved for benefits. Cortec appealed, and a hearing was held on August 2, 2001 before an unemployment law judge. Following the hearing, the unemployment law judge reversed the department's initial determination. The commissioner's representative affirmed the unemployment law judge's determination.

D E C I S I O N

Factual findings are reviewed in the light most favorable to the decision. Lolling v. Midwest Patrol, 545 N.W.2d 372, 377 (Minn. 1996). On appeal, this court defers to the commissioner's representative's ability to weigh the evidence and credibility of witnesses, and we will not reweigh the evidence. Whitehead v. Moonlight Nursing Care, Inc., 529 N.W.2d 350, 352 (Minn. App. 1995).

An individual applying for unemployment benefits is disqualified if that individual quit his employment. Minn. Stat. 268.095, subd. 1 (2000). The statute contains several exceptions, including quitting "because of good reason caused by the employer." Id. The statute defines the terms "quit" and "good reason" as:

A quit from employment occurs when the decision to end the employment was, at the time the employment ended, the employee's.

 

* * * *

 

A good reason caused by the employer for quitting is a reason

 

(1) that is directly related to the employment and for which the employer is responsible; and

(2) that is significant and would compel an average, reasonable worker to quit and become unemployed rather than remaining in the employment.

 

Id., subd. 2(a), 3(a) The commissioner's representative's determination that Schwerzler quit his employment without good reason caused by the employer is supported by the evidence in the record.

Affirmed.