David Fulmer v. Director, Division of Workforce Services - Appeal of Overpayment Decision
Summary
The Arkansas Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a decision by the Arkansas Board of Review concerning David Fulmer's unemployment benefits. The Board had dismissed Fulmer's appeal as untimely, but the court found the Board erred by treating a waiver request as an appeal from a prior decision. The case is remanded for the Board to address Fulmer's waiver request.
What changed
The Arkansas Court of Appeals, in David Fulmer v. Director, Division of Workforce Services, reversed and remanded a decision by the Arkansas Board of Review. The Board had dismissed Fulmer's appeal concerning an unemployment benefits overpayment of $5,474 as untimely. The appellate court found that the Board erred by treating Fulmer's request for a waiver of repayment as an appeal from a prior determination, rather than addressing the waiver request itself.
This decision means the Arkansas Board of Review must now consider David Fulmer's request for a waiver of the $5,474 unemployment benefits overpayment. Regulated entities, particularly employers involved in unemployment claims, should ensure that requests for waivers or appeals are correctly categorized and processed by administrative bodies to avoid procedural dismissals. Failure to properly handle such requests could lead to further appeals and delays.
What to do next
- Review internal procedures for handling unemployment benefit overpayment waiver requests and appeals to ensure correct categorization.
- Ensure that all waiver requests are addressed on their merits, distinct from appeals of initial determinations.
Source document (simplified)
Jump To
Support FLP
CourtListener is a project of Free
Law Project, a federally-recognized 501(c)(3) non-profit. Members help support our work and get special access to features.
Please become a member today.
March 4, 2026 Get Citation Alerts Download PDF Add Note
David Fulmer v. Director, Division of Workforce Services
Court of Appeals of Arkansas
- Citations: 2026 Ark. App. 152
Docket Number: Unknown
Combined Opinion
Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 152
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
DIVISION 1
No. E-25-150
Opinion Delivered March 4, 2026
DAVID FULMER
APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS
BOARD OF REVIEW
V. [NO. 2025-BR-00663]
DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF
WORKFORCE SERVICES; AND REVERSED AND REMANDED
LAKELAND HOMES & PROPERTY
MGT
APPELLEES
CASEY R. TUCKER, Judge
David Fulmer appeals the decision of the Arkansas Board of Review (the Board)
dismissing his appeal. We agree that the Board acted in error: it treated Fulmer’s request for
a waiver of repayment as an appeal from a November 2023 decision and proceeded to dismiss
it as untimely. We reverse and remand for action consistent with this opinion.
On September 17, 2025, the Arkansas Division of Workforce Services (the Division)
mailed Fulmer a notice that the director of the Division (the Director) had determined
Fulmer had been overpaid $391 a month in unemployment-compensation benefits from
September to December 2023, for a total amount of $5,474, that he was not entitled to
receive. The Director also determined that the overpayment was not due to any fraud on
Fulmer’s part. On October 2, 2025, Fulmer, through counsel, submitted a formal request
for a waiver of repayment of the overpaid amount or, in the alternative, a notice of appeal
of the determination. The request referenced Arkansas Code Annotated section 11-10-
532(b)(2) (Supp. 2025), which provides that the Director may consider whether recovery of
the overpayment would be against equity and good conscience when the overpayment is not
due to the recipient’s fault. Fulmer’s attorney explained in detail why requiring repayment
would work an inequitable hardship on Fulmer and concluded with a request for
confirmation of receipt of “this waiver request and in the alternative appeal.”
The Division erroneously treated the request for waiver of repayment as an appeal
from the Division’s 2023 decision in which it denied Fulmer unemployment-compensation
benefits. A telephone hearing was held on October 17, 2025. On October 21, the Board
dismissed Fulmer’s appeal of the November 2023 order as untimely, finding that Fulmer had
not shown circumstances beyond his control for the delay in filing his appeal. The error in
the Board’s decision was that no such appeal was before it. Fulmer was not appealing the
2023 order. He was requesting a waiver of repayment, notice of which he received in
September 2025.
The whole process of the hearing and the resulting decision by the Board were for
naught as they had nothing to do with Mr. Fulmer’s written request for a waiver of repayment
of the Division’s overpayment. Mr. Fulmer’s request for a waiver remains unanswered.
Thus, we reverse and remand this matter for the Board to appropriately address Fulmer’s
request.
Reversed and remanded.
2
KLAPPENBACH, C.J., and HIXSON, J., agree.
David Fulmer, pro se appellant.
Cynthia L. Uhrynowycz, for appellee.
3
Related changes
Source
Classification
Who this affects
Taxonomy
Browse Categories
Get State Courts alerts
Weekly digest. AI-summarized, no noise.
Free. Unsubscribe anytime.
Get alerts for this source
We'll email you when Arkansas Court of Appeals publishes new changes.