Legal Opinion

Molnar v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 30, 1997No. G020915PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

SONENSHINE, J.

The California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, the California Employment Development Department (EDD), and A1 Lee, EDO’s director, appeal from a judgment granting Denis Charles Molnar’s petition for an administrative writ of mandamus. In this case of first impression, we are asked to define work requirements pursuant to Unemployment Insurance Code section 1277, 2 subdivision (a) in the context of an involuntarily terminated employee’s second claim for unemployment benefits.

I

Xerox laid off Molnar in January 1994, offering him as part of a severance package a lump-sum…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Social Security Board v. NierotkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. California Employment Commission v. KovacevichCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  3. SUTCO CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. v. Modesto High School Dist.California Court of Appeal · 1989
  4. Lisec v. United Airlines, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1992
  5. Kerin v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Goldstein v. Cal. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  2. Goldstein v. Cal. Unemployment Ins. Appeals Bd.California Court of Appeal · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API