Legal Opinion

Reed v. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Golden Valley, District 5

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 3, 1988No. C4-88-4PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HAROLD W. SCHULTZ, Acting Judge.

A Commissioner’s representative from the Minnesota Department of Jobs and Training determined that respondent employee, who had engaged in off-duty harassment of other employees, was not guilty of misconduct for unemployment compensation purposes. Concluding that respondent’s actions constituted misconduct as a matter of law, we reverse.

FACTS

Respondent Michael Reed was employed by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (“DOT”) as a highway technician until July 20, 1987, when he was discharged for failing to obey an order to discontinue his off-duty…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
  2. Lumpkin v. North Central Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
  3. Smith v. Employers' Overload Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  4. Gregory v. AndersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
  5. Booher v. Transport Clearings of Twin Cities, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Gradine v. College of St. ScholasticaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
  2. Redalen v. Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
  3. Forester v. Value Travel, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
  4. Gradine v. College of St. ScholasticaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
  5. Hein v. Gresen DivisionCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996

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

Powered by the Exa API