Santillana v. Central Minnesota Council on Aging
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HALBROOKS, Judge.
Relator brings this pro se certiorari appeal to challenge the unemployment-law judge’s (ULJ) determination that she is ineligible for unemployment benefits because she was discharged for both employment misconduct and aggravated employment misconduct. Because relator’s discharge for employment misconduct is supported by substantial evidence in the record, we affirm the ULJ’s determination that she is ineligible for unemployment benefits. But because relator was discharged for actions that she committed before her employment began that subsequently resulted in a felony…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
- Jenkins v. American Express Financial Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- Scheunemann v. Radisson South HotelCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Heitman v. Cronstroms Manufacturing, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Independent School District No. 709 v. HansenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Icenhower v. Total Automotive, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
- Nina Wilson v. Mortgage Resource Center, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic DevelopmentSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- Andrew R. Patson, Relator v. Skaff Apartments, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic DevelopmentCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
- Nina Wilson v. Mortgage Resource Center, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic DevelopmentSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- Nina Wilson v. Mortgage Resource Center, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic DevelopmentSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.