Legal Opinion
Erne v. Employment Division
Court of Appeals of Oregon
Decided November 13, 1991No. 90-AB-1284; CA A66524PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*631EDMONDS, J.
The Employment Appeals Board (EAB) held that, because claimant’s discharge was for “misconduct connected with work,” he is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. ORS 657.176(2)(a); OAR 471-30-038(3). Claimant seeks review, and we affirm.
EAB found:
“(1) Claimant worked as a field apprentice for Western Pneumatics, Inc. from June 29, 1989, until April 12, 1990. (2) Claimant travelled to various locations in a designated company vehicle to install machinery at mills of the employer’s clients. (3) Claimant regularly stayed overnight in such locations while installing the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Springfield Education Ass'n v. Springfield School District No. 19Oregon Supreme Court · 1980
- City of Roseburg v. Roseburg City Firefighters, Local No. 1489Oregon Supreme Court · 1981
- McCann v. Oregon Liquor Control CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
- Glide Lumber Products Co. v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
- Veneer v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Collingsworth General Hospital v. HunnicuttTexas Supreme Court · 1998
- Coffey v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- Crane v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1993
- Levu v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1997
- Bettis v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.