Background
After a 2022 audit, the Illinois Department of Employment Security assessed Thirteen RF, Inc. for unpaid unemployment-insurance contributions involving five workers. Thirteen, a company providing back-office, architectural, fabrication, and equipment-rental services, protested and contended the workers were independent contractors.
Following a hearing, an administrative law judge issued a March 4, 2025 recommended decision that largely favored Thirteen: four of the five workers were excluded from employment, and the assessment was modified as to the remaining worker. The decision stated that objections were due within 20 days of service. The Department mailed it by certified mail on March 4, but Thirteen received it on March 21 and filed no objections. It instead sought administrative review in circuit court on April 25.
The Court’s Holding
The appellate court affirmed the circuit court’s dismissal of Thirteen’s administrative-review complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Under the Unemployment Insurance Act, service was complete when the Department deposited the recommended decision in the mail on March 4. Thirteen therefore had until March 24 to file objections, which it undisputedly did not do.
The court rejected Thirteen’s due-process argument that receiving the decision only three and a half days before the objection deadline deprived it of a meaningful opportunity to respond. The Department timely mailed the decision, and Thirteen did not explain why it could not file objections in that period. Its prior protest and hearing participation showed familiarity with the facts and legal issues, and only one worker remained at issue.
Key Takeaways
- For this unemployment-insurance proceeding, mailed notice was deemed served when deposited in the U.S. mail, not when received.
- A party must use the available objection procedure before seeking judicial review of an agency decision.
- A short period between actual receipt and a filing deadline does not establish a due-process violation without a concrete showing that meaningful response was impossible.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that Illinois administrative-review procedures are strict. Parties must track service rules and preserve objections within agency deadlines, even when mail delivery leaves little practical time to act.