Legal Opinion
Barstow v. Honeywell, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 2, 1986No. CO-86-1193PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LESLIE, Judge.
Relator Michael Barstow appeals by writ of certiorari from a determination that he was discharged for misconduct. We affirm.
FACTS
Michael Barstow had worked for several years as an inspector in Honeywell’s Defense Systems Division when he was discharged on February 26, 1985 for misconduct.
Honeywell categorizes different types of unsatisfactory employee behavior as first, second, third, or fourth degree offenses. Demerits are meted out according to the severity of an offense, ranging from warning slips for first degree offenses to layoffs or discharge for fourth degree…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
- Cary v. Custom Coach, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- Giddens v. Employment Security CommissionMichigan Court of Appeals · 1966
- Flahave v. Lang Meat PackingCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- Woodward v. Interstate Office SystemsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Bibeau v. Resistance Technology, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Cavalier v. C. Machine Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Minnesota Boxed Meats, Inc. v. ZadwornyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Monyoro v. Marriott Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Skic v. Beverage TransportationCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987