Legal Opinion
Prosper, Inc. v. Department of Workforce Services
Court of Appeals of Utah
Decided August 23, 2007No. 20060734-CAPublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ORME, Judge:
T1 Prosper, Inc. petitions for review of the Workforce Appeals Board's decision affirming the award of unemployment benefits to Katrina Iversen. Prosper argues that the Board erroneously applied the "residuum rule" in concluding that Prosper failed to sustain its burden of proof because Prosper relied exclusively on hearsay evidence. We agree with Prosper that the Board misapplied the residuum rule.
BACKGROUND
12 Prosper is a Utah company that provides, among other services, long distance financial education services and products, including individual phone sessions with…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Kelley v. Airborne Freight Corp.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- State v. OlsenUtah Supreme Court · 1993
- Yacht Club v. Utah Liquor Control CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1984
- Mayes v. Department of Employment SecurityCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1988
- C.Y. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1998
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Arnold v. GrigsbyUtah Supreme Court · 2018
- Smith v. Workforce Appeals Board, Department of Workforce ServicesCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2011
- West Valley City v. CoyleCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2016
- Jex v. Labor CommissionCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2012
- K.O. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2010
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.