Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mickens v. Southland Exchange-Joint Venture

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided July 8, 1991No. 23430Published

1DissentHarwell, Justice

I respectfully dissent. It is my opinion that the circuit court exceeded its authority under its scope of review as set forth in the Administrative Procedures Act. There is substantial evidence in the record to support the Commission’s finding that *132Mickens was properly terminated for cause connected with his employment and that Mickens’ resulting unemployment was secured through fault of his own. Thus, I would reverse the order of the circuit court and reinstate the order of the Commission which denied Mickens unemployment benefits.

On appeal, the circuit court reversed the order of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pettey v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. Stone Mfg. Co. v. South Carolina Employment Security CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1951
  3. Merck v. South Carolina Employment Security CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1986
  4. DeGroot v. Employment Security CommissionCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1985
  5. Lee v. South Carolina Employment Security CommissionSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API