Legal Opinion · Dissent

Zeig v. South Dakota Department of Labor, Unemployment Insurance Division

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 10, 1983No. 13884, 13885Published

1DissentFosheim, Chief Justice

I dissent. Appellants Jerry and Larry Zeig were business owners and operators. They were not employees within the meaning of the unemployment compensation act. This was the initial issue at the agency level. It remains the central impediment to claimants’ qualification for unemployment compensation, a blizzard of procedural error allegations notwithstanding.

An officer of a corporation, as such, is not ineligible for unemployment compensation by virtue of SDCL 61-1-10. By owning 94% of the outstanding shares of J & L Gravel, however, appellants exercised full control of the corporation. They…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Starinieri Unemployment Compensation CaseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1972
  2. Ex Parte Alabama Textile Products CorporationSupreme Court of Alabama · 1942
  3. California Portland Cement Co. v. California Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  4. DePriest Unemployment Compensation CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1961
  5. Mednick Unemployment Compensation CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1961

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

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

Powered by the Exa API