Legal Opinion

Lee v. South Carolina Employment Security Commission

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided April 27, 1982No. 21701PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Ness, Justice:

This appeal is to determine appellant Lee’s entitlement to employment compensation. The single commissioner, full commission, and circuit court agreed Lee was discharged for cause connected with his work pursuant to § 41-35-120(2), S. C. Code of Laws, (1976), and thus disqualified from receiving benefits. We affirm.

Appellant contends the commission and lower court erred in defining the term “misconduct.” Lee argues ■that “misconduct” mandates some wilful or deliberate act. We disagree with appellant.

Section 41-35-120(2) provides:

“Any insured worker shall be ineligible for…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Boynton Cab Co. v. NeubeckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Employment Security Board v. LeCatesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
  3. Maywood Glass Co. v. StewartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  4. Continental Oil Co. v. Board of Review of Industrial CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Stone Mfg. Co. v. South Carolina Employment Security CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1951

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. DeGroot v. Employment Security CommissionCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
  2. Mickens v. Southland Exchange-Joint VentureSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  3. Milliken & Co. v. South Carolina Employment Security CommissionCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1994
  4. Mickens v. Southland Exchange-Joint VentureSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991
  5. Mickens v. Southland Exchange-Joint VentureSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1991

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API