DENIAL PERIOD, Reasonable assurance, Question of fact, Totality of circumstances
CITE AS: Lansing School District v Beard, unpublished per curiam Court of Appeals November 29, 1990 (No. 118334).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Dan F. Beard
Employer: Lansing School District
Docket No. B87-16460-107488
COURT OF APPEALS HOLDING: Whether there is reasonable assurance is a question of fact to be determined in light of the totality of the circumstances.
FACTS: The claimant was a vocational data processing teacher. Because he was not certified as a vocational education teacher, the claimant was subject to annual authorization. On May 5, 1987, the claimant received a letter requesting that he make plans for obtaining his temporary or permanent vocational educational certification. In this letter, the claimant was informed that all jobs held by teachers who were not vocationally certified by July 1, 1987, would be posted for other applicants. On May 22, 1987, the claimant received a memorandum stating that unless specifically notified to the contrary, he had reasonable assurance of employment for the following school year.
DECISION: The claimant was not ineligible under Section 27(i).
RATIONALE: The May 22, 1987, memorandum did not constitute adequate assurance as a matter of law. Whether there was reasonable assurance was a question of fact. The ambiguity contained in the May 22, 1987, memorandum and the existence of the May 5, 1987, memorandum indicated that the claimant had not received adequate assurance of continued employment sufficient to bar his claim for benefits.
11, 13: N/A