Legal Opinion · Dissent

Holsum Shipley Baking Co. v. Terwilliger

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided November 27, 1991No. E 91-28Published

1DissentMelvin Mayfield, Judge

I cannot agree to affirm the Board of Review’s decision in this case. The case, in my opinion, should be remanded to the Board with directions for it to decide the issue relied upon by the appellant.

Neither the employer nor the employee was represented by counsel in this case and neither party field a brief. We have said, however, that unemployment benefits cases are not treated by our appellate rules the same as other civil cases are treated, and that it is not necessary for briefs to be filed in unemployment cases. Hunter v. Daniels, 2 Ark. App. 94, 616 S.W.2d 763 (1981). Therefore, it is…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Reddick v. ScottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1950
  2. Hays v. Batesville Mfg. Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1971
  3. Hunter v. DanielsCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1981
  4. Lawrence v. EverettCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1983

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

Powered by the Exa API