Legal Opinion

Debnam v. Director, Department of Workforce Services

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided September 30, 2015No. E-14-1042PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCliff Hoofman, Judge

|,Appellant Eddie Debnam appeals from the Arkansas Board of Review’s November 26, 2014 order, finding him ineligible for unemployment benefits because he was not available for suitable work. On appeal, appellant’s sole contention is that the Board lacked substantial evidence to deny him unemployment benefits on the basis that he was unavailable for work due to a lack of transportation. We reverse and remand.

Appellant filed an application for unemployment benefits, in which the “Yes” check boxes were marked that he was able to begin work immediately and that he was able to work full time.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sanyo Manufacturing Corp. v. StilesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1986
  2. Holmes v. Director, Department of Workforce ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2015
  3. McDaniel v. Director, Department of Workforce ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2008
  4. Buchanan v. Director, Arkansas Employment Security DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2005
  5. Hefton v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1980

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Rachel Hourston v. Director, Department of Workforce ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2022
  2. Richard Hastings v. Director, Division of Workforce ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2025
  3. Richard Hastings v. Director, Division of Workforce ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2025
  4. Paula Banks v. DirectorCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API