A. Within 30 days after the decision of the Commission upon a hearing pursuant to § 60.2-622 has been mailed, any party aggrieved who seeks judicial review shall commence an action in the circuit court of the county or city in which the individual who filed the claim was last employed. In such action against the Commission, the Commission and any other party to the administrative procedures before the Commission shall be named a defendant in a petition for judicial review. Such petition shall also state the grounds upon which a review is sought; it shall be served upon a member of the Commission or upon such person as the Commission may designate, and such service shall be deemed completed service on all parties. There shall be left with the party so served as many copies of the petition as there are defendants, and the Commission shall forthwith mail one such copy to each such defendant. With its answer, the Commission shall certify and file with the court all documents and papers and a transcript of all testimony taken in the matter, together with its findings of fact and decision therein. In any judicial proceedings under this chapter, the findings of the Commission as to the facts, if supported by evidence and in the absence of fraud, shall be conclusive, and the jurisdiction of the court shall be confined to questions of law. Such actions and the questions so certified shall be heard in a summary manner at the earliest possible date. An appeal may be taken from the decision of the court to the Court of Appeals in conformity with Part Five A of the Rules of Supreme Court and other applicable laws.
B. From any circuit court decision involving (i) the provisions of § 60.2-612 or § 60.2-618, (ii) whether an employing unit constitutes an employer or (iii) whether services performed for or in connection with the business of an employing unit constitute employment for such employing unit, the Court of Appeals shall have jurisdiction to review such decision regardless of the amount involved in any claim for benefits. It shall not be necessary, in any proceeding under this chapter, to enter exceptions to the rulings of the Commission or an appeals examiner, and no bond shall be required upon an appeal to any court. Upon the final determination of such judicial proceeding, the Commission shall administer the Unemployment Compensation Fund in accordance with such determination.
C. The Commission shall have the right to appeal a decision of a circuit court in any proceeding under this chapter.
1980, c. 463, § 60.1-67.1; 1982, c. 24; 1984, c. 703; 1986, c. 480; 1987, c. 567; 1988, c. 766; 1996, c. 573; 2024, cc. 562, 603.
Notes of Decisions
Virginia Emp. Comm'n v. Gantt, 376 S.E.2d 808 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 12× “Therefore, in order to constitute misconduct, the total circumstances must be sufficient to find a deliberate act of the employee which disregards the employer's business interest. The Unemployment Compensation Act provides that the factual findings of the Employment Commission…”
Smith v. Virginia Emp. Comm'n, 721 S.E.2d 18 (Va. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 6× “During the course of her employment, she consistently made routing mistakes that caused truckers to be overpaid for their routes. She received three written (along with various verbal) warnings regarding the quality of her work.”
Johnson v. Virginia Emp. Com'n, 382 S.E.2d 476 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 4× “" The commission specifically found that Johnson had refused, without "good cause," Magnox's offer for "suitable work.”
Whitt v. Race Fork Coal Corp., 441 S.E.2d 357 (Va. Ct. App. 1994).
· cites it 6× “Code § 60.2-625 (A) provides, in pertinent part: Within ten days after the decision of the Commission .”
Deborah A. Wood v. VEC & Americomm Direct, etc, 458 S.E.2d 319 (Va. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 8× “Upon review, the Commission, acting through a special examiner pursuant to Code § 60.2-622(C), denied benefits on the ground that Ms.”
McNamara v. Virginia Emp. Comm'n, 681 S.E.2d 67 (Va. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 3× “The special examiner's decision "shall be the final decision of the Commission under this section, subject to judicial review under § 60.2-625.” Code § 60.2-622(C). 2 . Counsel for the commission contended at oral argument that the commission's factual findings related to the…”
Virginia Emp. Comm'n v. Fitzgerald, 452 S.E.2d 692 (Va. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 4× “In undertaking judicial review of a commission decision pursuant to Code § 60.2-625(A), “the courts must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the finding by the Commission.”
Wells Fargo Alarm Servs., Inc. v. Virginia Emp. Comm'n, 482 S.E.2d 841 (Va. Ct. App. 1997).
· cites it 3× “” The trial judge concluded that a remand was unnecessary because ‘Wells Fargo ha[d] not made out a prima facie case of extrinsic fraud as contemplated by Va.Code § 60.2-625 and Jones v. Willard, 224 Va.”
Israel v. Virginia Emp. Comm'n, 372 S.E.2d 207 (Va. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 2× “” Code § 60.2-625(A); see Lee v. Virginia Employment Comm’n, 1 Va.”
Shuler v. Virginia Emp. Comm'n, 384 S.E.2d 122 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “It is not disputed that Shuler was removed from the payroll two or three days before the scheduled July 11 meeting.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 60.2-625(A) — 71 cases
Virginia Emp. Comm'n v. Gantt, 376 S.E.2d 808 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
“Therefore, in order to constitute misconduct, the total circumstances must be sufficient to find a deliberate act of the employee which disregards the employer's business interest. The Unemployment Compensation Act provides that the factual findings of the Employment Commission…”
Smith v. Virginia Emp. Comm'n, 721 S.E.2d 18 (Va. Ct. App. 2012).
“During the course of her employment, she consistently made routing mistakes that caused truckers to be overpaid for their routes. She received three written (along with various verbal) warnings regarding the quality of her work.”
Johnson v. Virginia Emp. Com'n, 382 S.E.2d 476 (Va. Ct. App. 1989).
“" The commission specifically found that Johnson had refused, without "good cause," Magnox's offer for "suitable work.”
Virginia Emp. Comm'n v. Fitzgerald, 452 S.E.2d 692 (Va. Ct. App. 1995).
“In undertaking judicial review of a commission decision pursuant to Code § 60.2-625(A), “the courts must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the finding by the Commission.”
— Va. Code Ann. § 60.2-625(a) — 3 cases
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.