Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Carroll v. Maine Employment Security Commission

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided September 7, 1982Published

1Concurrence

DUFRESNE, Active Retired Justice

(further concurring in separate opinion).

Disregarding for the time being the propriety of the penalty or disqualification portion of the agency decision as approved by the Superior Court, we cannot sustain the agency finding that the claimant knowingly and fraudulently failed to disclose material facts in his application for the purpose of obtaining unemployment compensation benefits. First, we note that the application *474form does not request the disclosure of other facts, material or otherwise, not called for by the several questions listed on the form itself…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. SugimotoHawaii Supreme Court · 1980
  2. Tobin v. Maine Employment Security CommissionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
  3. Ainoa v. Unemployment Compensation Appeals DivisionHawaii Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Paige v. Maine Employment Security CommissionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1978
  5. Lawrence v. State Employment Security CommissionSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981

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

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

Powered by the Exa API