John M. Custin v. Harold J. Wirths, et al.

As was the situation for Josef K in Kafka’s The Trial NJDOL's Appeals Tribunal proceedings are Inquisitorial - typical of the type of proceedings employed by autocratic governments. Actions against claimants are commenced by an accusation - the identity of the entity originating the accusation, its pleadings, and its secret documents faxed to the Tribunal are customarily withheld from a claimant’s discovery. Petitioner received a Notice in the mail from NJDOL shortly after filing his claim for UI benefits on April 26th 2010 accusing him of “misconduct connected to the work” without specifying the entity leveling it. Just as was the situation with Josef K Petitioner learned that the charge of “misconduct connected to the work” of unknown origin has unconstitutional “stickiness” attached to it: it survives initial claims hearings even when the charge is dismissed and often follows a claimant around for years and requires a Tribunal agent to physically remove it from your case file. The penalty imposed has a Draconian effect and the initial “refund” can cause a loss of the ability to pay the premiums on COBRA health insurances and disqualifies you from future UI claims such as EB and training programs (ABT). Just as was the case with the character Josef K in Kafka’s “The Trial” Petitioner was forbidden from learning the identity of the unknown accuser. When Petitioner tried to discover the source of the accusation [ Interrogatories 1-6 App. infra 126a- 127a ]. Admissions Requests #20 - #22 App. infra 148a ] he was told by the Respondents that they had “already produced” that information to him - when indeed they had not. When Petitioner appealed to the Magistrate Judge that the Respondents’ attorney had not produced the requested information as to what -1 -