Champion v. Employment Dep't

A board’s order will be remanded if the “order is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence exists to support a finding of fact when the record, viewed as a whole, would permit a reasonable person to make that finding.” ORS 183.482(8)(c).

Petitioner appealed a decision of the Employment Appeals Board (EAB) denying her application for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA). Under the CARES Act, a person is considered a “covered individual” if they self-certify that they are able to work but cannot do so because of “one of 11 reasons related to the COVID-19 pandemic.” Pub L 116-136, § 2102(a)(3). Petitioner asserted three assignments of errors: 1) she qualified as a “covered individual” because she contracted COVID-19; 2) she qualified because she lost income due to the stay-at-home order; and 3) she qualified because her partner passed away due to complications from COVID-19. In response to petitioner’s arguments, EAB asserted that petitioner ultimately did not qualify because her unemployment was the result of voluntarily leaving jobs in the months that she asserted COVID reasons, and not the COVID reasons themselves. A board’s order will be remanded if the “order is not supported by substantial evidence in the record. Substantial evidence exists to support a finding of fact when the record, viewed as a whole, would permit a reasonable person to make that finding.” ORS 183.482(8)(c). Reiterating that they are bound by the facts in the record, the Court held that, due to petitioner’s lack of documentation demonstrating unemployment as a direct result of COVID-19, EAB's decision was based on substantial evidence. Affirmed.