Subscribe to School Law Newsletter
Close Window

A General Fear of COVID-19 Not Enough for Unemployment Assistance

In the case of King v. Dir., Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 2023-Ohio-1724, an appellate court held that the former employee’s general fear of contracting COVID-19 was not a qualifying condition that would entitle the former employee for pandemic unemployment assistance (“PUA”).

In this case, the former employee argued that the former employee was entitled to PUA benefits due to the former employee quitting out of a fear of contracting COVID-19. In response, the department argued that a fear of contracting COVID-19 is not one of the enumerated qualifying conditions under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”). The appellate court agreed with the department.

In support of its decision in favor of the department, the appellate court explained that a mere fear of contracting COVID-19 was not a qualifying condition as listed in the CARES Act. The appellate court further explained that the former employee was unable to show any evidence that the former employee had a qualifying condition that forced the former employee to leave his job.

To read this case, click here.

Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.

Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always-changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.