Tejuana Dillard v. Director, Division of Workforce Services; And Na Security, Inc.
This text of Tejuana Dillard v. Director, Division of Workforce Services; And Na Security, Inc. (Tejuana Dillard v. Director, Division of Workforce Services; And Na Security, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Cite as 2026 Ark. App. 291 ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION I No. E-26-15
Opinion Delivered May 13, 2026 TEJUANA DILLARD APPELLANT APPEAL FROM THE ARKANSAS BOARD OF REVIEW V. [NO. 2025-BR-00806]
DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF WORKFORCE SERVICES; AND NA SECURITY, INC. REVERSED AND REMANDED APPELLEES
N. MARK KLAPPENBACH, Chief Judge
Tejuana Dillard appeals from a decision of the Arkansas Board of Review dismissing
her appeal as untimely and denying her request to reopen the appeal. We reverse and
remand.
Dillard applied for unemployment benefits in June 2024 and began receiving
benefits. On September 25, 2024, however, the Division of Workforce Services issued a
notice of agency determination finding Dillard ineligible to receive benefits. Nearly a year
later, on August 21, 2025, Dillard was mailed a notice of overpayment determination (non-
fraud). This notice stated that Dillard was required to repay $3094 in unemployment
benefits that she was not entitled to receive. The notice stated that Dillard had twenty
calendar days to appeal the determination. On September 3, 2025, Dillard filed an appeal with the Arkansas Appeal Tribunal. Her petition for appeal stated that she was appealing
the issue of “repayment.”
Upon receiving Dillard’s appeal, the Tribunal erroneously treated it as an appeal of
the Division’s September 2024 determination that Dillard was ineligible for benefits. This
led to the Tribunal, and ultimately the Board, dismissing the appeal as untimely. The error
was that no such appeal was before the Tribunal. See Fulmer v. Dir., 2026 Ark. App. 152.
Rather, as stated in her petition for appeal, Dillard was appealing the issue of repayment.
This issue was decided in the August 21, 2025 notice of overpayment determination, and
her appeal was timely as to that notice. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for Dillard’s
appeal of that determination to be addressed.
Reversed and remanded.
GLADWIN and HIXSON, JJ., agree.
Tejuana Dillard, pro se appellant.
Cynthia L. Uhrynowycz, for appellee.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Tejuana Dillard v. Director, Division of Workforce Services; And Na Security, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tejuana-dillard-v-director-division-of-workforce-services-and-na-arkctapp-2026.