Legal Opinion

Rash v. Employment Division

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided June 3, 1987No. 86-AB-1442; CA A41775PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoomissen, J.

Claimant seeks review of an Employment Appeals Board order denying his claim for unemployment benefits. He contends that EAB erred in concluding that he did not have sufficient wages and weeks of work with Oregon-Pacific Salmon Ranch (employer) to establish a claim. The question is whether EAB erred in determining that employer is an “agricultural employer,” as defined by ORS 657.045(3)(c), thus excluding claimant’s wages and weeks of work for employer in considering his eligibility for benefits. We reverse.

Claimant was employed from May, 1984, until July, 1985. Employer operates a salmon…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Puget Sound Bridge & Dredging Co. v. State Unemployment Compensation CommissionOregon Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Just-A-Mere Farm, Inc. v. PeetOregon Supreme Court · 1967
  3. Lenhardt Airpark, Inc. v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  4. M/V Dake II Co. v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ochoa v. Weisensee Ranch, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
  2. Haynes v NeshewatMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
  3. Haynes v NeshewatMichigan Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Ochoa v. Weisensee Ranch, Inc.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API