Stubbs appealed of the denial of his claim for unemployment benefits. The appellate panel found his mailing of his appeal was untimely. The administrative law judge affirmed ruling that Stubbs did not deposit his appeal in a post office box. The panel, with one judge concurring only in result, reversed and remanded. The majority held that the administrative law judge found facts in its ruling which is barred by the statute authorizing review of unemployment decisions. The case was remanded for review of the timeliness finding based on the record developed by the appellate panel.
Husband appealed the family court’s refusal to admit certain evidence and the valuation of certain assets. The panel affirmed as modified. It held the family court properly did not allow evidence from wife’s email into evidence as husband obtained it through spyware and the alleged relationship mentioned in the emails did not affect any issue before the court. The valuation decisions were affirmed as to rental property as the evidence demonstrated that monies used to purchase and maintain the properties were commingled with the marital property to such an extent as to become marital property. The panel held that the valuation of husband’s business was incorrect as the value increase between the time of filing and the time of judgment and this increase was the result of husband’s active management of the business. The panel ordered wife to pay husband an amount that would effectuate the 5545 split. The panel finally affirmed an attorney fee award to wife as reasonable under the circumstance.
Brannon’s probation was revoked without a hearing based on the petition to revoke and his waiver of hearing and counsel. The panel remanded the case for findings on the record as to whether the hearing and counsel were knowingly and voluntarily waived.