Wilneyda Luna, CSC Docket No. 2020-2315
NJ Civil Service Commission decision of May 20, 2020, CSC Docket No. 2020-2315: removal from an eligible list, granted. Wilneyda Luna, represented by Francisco S. Guzman, Esq., appeals the removal of her name from the Principal Account Clerk (M0380U), Jersey City, eligible list for failure to respon
Commission decisions · Meeting of May 20, 2020
Wilneyda Luna, represented by Francisco S. Guzman, Esq., appeals the removal of her name from the Principal Account Clerk (M0380U), Jersey City, eligible list for failure to respond to the certification notice.
- Matter
- Removal from an eligible list
- Decided
- May 20, 2020, item B-6
- Outcome
- Granted
- Stated ground
- Did not respond or appear
- Title
- PRINCIPAL ACCOUNT CLERK
- Employer
- Jersey City
- Examination
- M0380U
- Chair at the time
- Deirdre L. Webster Cobb, Chairperson
- Official decision
- Published by CSC in its monthly archive bundle (B-006 05-20-20.pdf)
Action recorded in the minutes: The Civil Service Commission directed that this appeal be granted.
Rules this decision applies
The decision
BackgroundWilneyda Luna, represented by Francisco S. Guzman, Esq., appeals the removal of her name from the Principal Account Clerk (M0380U), Jersey City, eligible list for failure to respond to the certification notice.
The appellant’s name was certified to the appointing authority on August 30, 2019 on certification OL191045. The appellant was sent notice of the subject certification on or around September 9, 2019. However, the appellant’s name was removed from the list for failing to respond to the certification. The list expired on November 9, 2019.
Appellant's argumentOn appeal, the appellant submits a notarized sworn statement indicating that she never received the subject certification notice.
BackgroundAlthough given the opportunity, the appointing authority did not respond.
CONCLUSION
RuleN.J.A.C. 4A:4-4.7(a)6 provides that an eligible’s name may be removed from a list for “non-compliance with the instructions listed on the notice of certification.” N.J.A.C. 4A:4-6.3(b), in conjunction with N.J.A.C. 4A:4-4.7(d), provides that the appellant has the burden of proof to show by a preponderance of the evidence that an appointing authority’s decision to remove the appellant’s name from an eligible list was in error.
AnalysisIn the instant matter, the appellant submitted a notarized statement, attesting to the fact that she did not receive the Notice of Certification in question. While there is a presumption that mail correctly addressed, stamped and mailed was received by the party to whom it was addressed, the appellant has rebutted that presumption in submitting her notarized statement in this matter. See SSI Medical Services, Inc. v. State Department of Human Services, 146 N.J.614 (1996); Szczesny v. Vasquez, 71 N.J. Super. 347, 354 (App. Div. 1962); In the Matter of Joseph Bahun, Docket No. A-1132-00T5F (App. Div. May 21, 2001). Therefore, the Civil Service Commission finds that the appellant’s name shall be restored to the subject eligible list. As this list expired on November 9, 2019, the list shall be revived at the time of the next certification to allow the appellant to be considered for prospective appointment.
ORDER
Therefore, it is ordered that this appeal be granted, Wilneyda Luna’s name be restored to the Principal Account Clerk (M0380U), Jersey City promotional eligible list, and the list be revived at the time of the next certification to allow the appellant to be considered for prospective appointment.
ClosingThis is the final administrative determination in this matter. Any further review should be pursued in a judicial forum.
Decisions this one cites
- Szczesny v. Vasquez 71 N.J. Super. 347, 354
- In the Matter of Joseph Bahun Docket No. A-1132-00T5F (May 21, 2001)
About this page
Not an official copy. The decision of record is CSC's monthly archive. The text above was extracted from it and may differ in layout or, rarely, in a character.
Names appear as the Commission published them in its public minutes and decisions, initials where it used initials. This site does not offer a search by a person's name.
The labels are ours. The kind of matter and the outcome are our reading of the minutes; the ACTION text the Commission recorded is quoted verbatim above. A decision applies the rules to its own facts and is not a prediction for any other matter, and nothing here is legal advice.
To report an error on this page, use the contact form.