A. A representative designated by the department as a deputy shall promptly examine any claim for benefits and, on the basis of the facts found by the deputy, shall determine whether or not the claim is valid. If the claim is valid, the deputy shall also determine the week with respect to which the benefit year shall commence, the weekly benefit amount payable and the maximum duration of the benefit.
B. The deputy shall promptly notify the claimant and any other interested parties of the determination and the reasons for the determination. Except as provided in subsection D of this section, unless the claimant or an interested party, within seven calendar days after the delivery of notification, or within fifteen calendar days after notification was mailed to the claimant's or interested party's last known address, files an appeal from the determination, it shall become final, and benefits shall be paid or denied in accordance with the determination. The department shall adopt rules to allow an appeal to be filed in writing, electronically or by telephone. If an appeal tribunal affirms a determination of the deputy allowing benefits, or the appeals board affirms a determination or decision allowing benefits, the benefits shall be paid regardless of any appeal that may thereafter be taken, but if that decision is finally reversed, no employer's account shall be charged with benefits so paid.
C. On receipt of a request from an interested party for information about a deputy's determination made pursuant to this section or section 23-673, the department shall make available by memorandum or other written document within five days after receipt of the request the following information:
1. The facts considered and the facts relied on in making the determination.
2. The specific statutes, regulations or other authority relied on in making the determination.
3. The reasoning applied in making the determination.
D. Before the time for appeal as prescribed in subsection B of this section has expired, an interested party may request a reconsidered determination. The department shall examine the request and, within seven calendar days, deny the request or issue a reconsidered determination. The interested party may prove that a response was timely filed by using evidence of fax records that documents the date and time when a faxed response was transmitted and received by the department. A request for reconsideration that is denied shall be treated as an appeal, and the same procedure shall be followed as provided for in case of appeal from the original determination. If a reconsidered determination is issued, the time for appeal shall run from the date of issuance of the reconsidered determination. The employer and the claimant shall each be permitted no more than one request for reconsideration on each case.
E. Before the actual filing of an appeal under subsection B of this section, but not later than the time permitted to appeal, the department on its own motion may issue a reconsidered determination. After the time for appeal has expired, but within one year after the issuance of the original determination, the department with authorization of the unemployment insurance program administrator may issue a reconsidered determination, on the basis of newly discovered evidence that by due diligence could not have been previously discovered, if no administrative or judicial review has occurred or is pending on the original determination. If a redetermination is based on fraud, the one year limitation on the issuance of redeterminations does not apply.
F. Prompt notice in writing of any reconsidered determination under subsection E of this section and the reasons for reconsideration shall be given to all interested parties. An interested party may appeal within the time prescribed under subsection B of this section, and the same procedure shall be followed as provided for in case of an appeal from the original determination.
Notes of Decisions
Wallis v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 617 P.2d 534 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 8× “Initially, the validity of a claim for unemployment benefits is determined by a deputy of the Department of Economic Security (DES), A.R.S. § 23-773(A). The claimant and any other parties interested in that determination are to be promptly notified of the deputy’s decision on…”
Bee-Gee, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 690 P.2d 129 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 4× “We read Levy to hold that the imposition of liability for unpaid insurance contributions by the predecessor employer under A.R.S. § 23-773(D), exists separate and independent of the liening power imposed under A.”
Rogers v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 644 P.2d 292 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1982).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 23-773. A dissatisfied claimant or employer may appeal from the deputy’s determination to a department appeal tribunal established pursuant to A.”
Salt River Proj. Agric. Improvement & Power Dist. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 750 P.2d 913 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “”) Under the statute and regulations cited above, a properly filed petition for review, by mail, certainly implies that the petition be placed in a correctly addressed, stamped envelope and placed in the hands of the United States Postal Service for delivery to the addressee.”
Miranda v. Beaman, 391 P.2d 555 (Ariz. 1964).
· cites it 2× “Pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-773 (1956), a representative of the Commission designated as a deputy, examined the claim and determined that Miranda was disqualified from receipt of the benefits claimed because he had previously withheld material facts with intent to obtain benefits.”
Janusz v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 759 P.2d 650 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “See generally A.R.S. § 23-773. Following a hearing, an appeal tribunal affirmed the deputy’s denial.”
Vickers v. W. Elec. Co., 339 P.2d 1033 (Ariz. 1959).
“We did hold on the question of availability, that the employer must have meant that the jobs of the employees were open to them, but, of course, on their own terms. It will be remembered however, we were there considering the employees directly involved who had or at least felt…”
Barriga v. Ades Precision (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 2× “See A.R.S. § 23-773(A), (B) (providing that a deputy must review applications for benefits and determine whether a claim is valid and promptly notify the claimant).”
Robles v. ades/tucson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
· cites it 2× “ADES/TUCSON Decision of the Court the party mails an appeal via the United States Postal Service (“USPS”), the appeal is considered filed on the date shown by the postmark. A.A.C. R6- 3-1404(A)(1).”
Barriga v. ades/precision (Ariz. 2024).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 23-773(A). This determination may be appealed to an appeals tribunal, where an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) may take testimony and admit evidence in reviewing the deputy’s determination.”
D'Agostino v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec. (D. Ariz. 2022).
· cites it 2× “§ 503 ; (3) failure 4 to comply with the presumption of continued eligibility pursuant to the Social Security 5 Act; (4) failure to meet statutory obligations pursuant to A.R.S. § 23-773; (5) failure to 6 meet statutory obligations pursuant to A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-773(A) — 3 cases
Wallis v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 617 P.2d 534 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
“Initially, the validity of a claim for unemployment benefits is determined by a deputy of the Department of Economic Security (DES), A.R.S. § 23-773(A). The claimant and any other parties interested in that determination are to be promptly notified of the deputy’s decision on…”
Barriga v. Ades Precision (Ariz. Ct. App. 2022).
“See A.R.S. § 23-773(A), (B) (providing that a deputy must review applications for benefits and determine whether a claim is valid and promptly notify the claimant).”
Barriga v. ades/precision (Ariz. 2024).
“A.R.S. § 23-773(A). This determination may be appealed to an appeals tribunal, where an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) may take testimony and admit evidence in reviewing the deputy’s determination.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-773(B) — 5 cases
Wallis v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 617 P.2d 534 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
“Initially, the validity of a claim for unemployment benefits is determined by a deputy of the Department of Economic Security (DES), A.R.S. § 23-773(A). The claimant and any other parties interested in that determination are to be promptly notified of the deputy’s decision on…”
Robles v. ades/tucson (Ariz. Ct. App. 2023).
“ADES/TUCSON Decision of the Court the party mails an appeal via the United States Postal Service (“USPS”), the appeal is considered filed on the date shown by the postmark. A.A.C. R6- 3-1404(A)(1).”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-773(D) — 1 case
Bee-Gee, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 690 P.2d 129 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
“We read Levy to hold that the imposition of liability for unpaid insurance contributions by the predecessor employer under A.R.S. § 23-773(D), exists separate and independent of the liening power imposed under A.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 23-773(E) — 1 case
Bee-Gee, Inc. v. Arizona Dep't of Econ. Sec., 690 P.2d 129 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1984).
“We read Levy to hold that the imposition of liability for unpaid insurance contributions by the predecessor employer under A.R.S. § 23-773(D), exists separate and independent of the liening power imposed under A.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.