Legal Opinion
Drysdale v. Department of Human Resources Development
California Court of Appeal
Decided February 2, 1978No. Civ. 42013PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WHITE, J. *
Plaintiff and appellant Ardath Drysdale appeals from a judgment of the Santa Clara County Superior Court denying her petition for writ of mandate to compel the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board to set aside its decision denying unemployment compensation benefits. We affirm the judgment.
Issue
Is there substantial evidence to support the conclusion that plaintiff’s behavior constituted wilful misconduct?
Statement Of Case
On November 18, 1976, plaintiff and appellant Ardath S. Drysdale caused a petition for writ of mandate to be filed in the Superior Court of Santa…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Skelly v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
- Lacy v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Borror v. Department of InvestmentCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
- Jacobs v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1972
- Maywood Glass Co. v. StewartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Amador v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
- Steve P. Rados, Inc. v. California Occupational Safety & Health Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- Department of Economic & Employment Development v. PropperCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1996
- Amador v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984