of Employment and Economic Development File Nos. 34637255-3,
C. Overom, Christopher S. Davis, Jr., Maki & Overom,
Ltd., Duluth, Minnesota (for relator)
Johnson, Wright, Minnesota (pro se respondent) Shawn Strang,
Cloquet, Minnesota (pro se respondent)
Nelson, Keri A. Phillips, Department of Employment and
Economic Development, St. Paul, Minnesota (for respondent
Considered and decided by Kirk, Presiding Judge; Schellhas,
Judge; and Bratvold, Judge.
an employee performs more than 50% of his or her total hours
during a calendar quarter in Minnesota, the employment was
"performed primarily in Minnesota" and therefore
the employee's entire employment during the calendar
quarter is "covered employment, " as defined in
Minn. Stat. § 268.035, subd. 12(a)(1)(i) (2016).
business is not subjected to double taxation in violation of
the Dormant Commerce Clause by application of Minn. Stat.
§ 268.035, subd. 12(a) (2016).
consolidated certiorari appeal, relator argues that
unemployment-law judges (1) erred in determining that its
employees are eligible for unemployment-insurance benefit
accounts in Minnesota, and (2) applied Minn. Stat. §
268.035, subd. 12(a), to result in double taxation of relator
in violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause. We affirm.
Superior Glass Inc. is a Wisconsin company with company
headquarters in Superior, Wisconsin. Respondent-employees
Lucas Johnson and Shawn Strang performed work for Superior
Glass in both Minnesota and Wisconsin during 2015 and 2016,
but Superior Glass laid them off for a period of time in
2016. Both employees applied for unemployment-insurance
benefits with respondent Minnesota Department of Employment
and Economic Development (DEED) because they lived in
employees earned wages during 2015 and 2016, and in support
of their benefits applications, provided DEED with detailed
logs of hours worked, broken down by day and by job. Based on
that information, DEED determined how many hours each
employee had worked in Minnesota and established base periods
for the determination of benefits. See Minn. Stat.
§ 268.035, subd. 4 (2016) (defining "base
period" and explaining how to determine base period).
DEED determined that both employees were eligible to receive
unemployment-insurance benefits because both worked more than
50% of their hours in Minnesota during certain calendar
quarters in the base periods and therefore performed their
employment primarily in Minnesota during those quarters. DEED
further determined that, for the quarters during which
Johnson and Strang performed their employment primarily in
Minnesota, their entire employment with Superior Glass was
"covered employment, " as defined in Minn. Stat.
§ 268.035, subd. 12(a)(1)(i). As to each employee, DEED
notified Superior Glass that "[u]nder Minnesota Statute
section 268.047, subd. 1, any unemployment benefits paid will
be used in computing the future unemployment tax rate of
Glass appealed DEED's determinations of eligibility.
Unemployment-law judges (ULJs) conducted telephone hearings,
affirmed DEED's determinations, and affirmed their
decisions after reconsideration. This consolidated certiorari
the ULJs err in determining that the employees' entire
employment during calendar quarters in which the employees
performed work primarily in Minnesota was "covered
employment, " as defined in Minn. Stat. § 268.035,
Does the ULJs' application of Minn. Stat. § 268.035,
subd. 12(a), subject Superior Glass to double taxation in