David R. Savard, Relator,
William Mitchell College of Law, Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent.
Department of Employment and Economic Development File No. 28051995-6.
David R. Savard, Apple Valley, Minnesota (pro se relator).
William Mitchell College of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota (respondent).
Lee B. Nelson, Amy R. Lawler, Department of Employment and Economic Development, St. Paul, Minnesota (for respondent Department of Employment and Economic Development).
Considered and decided by Stauber, Presiding Judge; Schellhas, Judge; and Hooten, Judge.
Relator appeals from an unemployment-law judge's decision that he was not entitled to wage credits for his part-time, year-round employment with respondent. We affirm.
Relator David Savard has two jobs: full-time employment as an auditor with the Minnesota Department of Revenue and part-time, year-round employment as a security officer with respondent William Mitchell College of Law. From July 1–20, 2011, Savard was laid off from his employment with the department of revenue due to the shutdown of the Minnesota government. He applied for unemployment benefits with respondent Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), and DEED determined that he was not entitled to wage credits for his employment with William Mitchell because "[w]ages the applicant earned with educational institutions cannot be used as the basis for unemployment benefits during the break between school years or terms." Savard appealed the determination, arguing that William Mitchell's academic year ended when its summer session ended on July 19, 2011.
An unemployment-law judge (ULJ) conducted an evidentiary hearing and decided that Savard's wages earned from William Mitchell could not be used for unemployment-benefit purposes for the period between two school terms. Savard requested reconsideration of the ULJ's decision, and a ULJ affirmed the decision. Savard appealed to this court by writ of certiorari, and this court reversed and remanded in an order opinion because the ULJ failed to address relator's argument that WMCL's summer session is not between two successive academic years or terms. Savard v. William Mitchell Coll. of Law, No. A11-2014 (Minn.App. Aug. 15, 2012). This court directed the ULJ to determine on remand whether William Mitchell's summer session is between two successive academic years or terms. Id.
On remand, a ULJ conducted an evidentiary hearing and decided that Savard's wages from William Mitchell must be removed from his base-period wages from May 15, 2011, to August 20, 2011, and could not be used to calculate Savard's weekly and maximum benefit amounts. Savard requested reconsideration of the ULJ's decision, and a ULJ affirmed the decision.
Savard appeals the ULJ's decision by writ ...