Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lundy v. Employment Division

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided May 8, 1978No. 77-AB-1124, CA 9251Published

1DissentTanzer, J.

I would hold that claimant’s acts did not constitute misconduct under ORS 657.176(2)(a) as a matter of law.

A preliminary distinction must be made. Unsatisfactory conduct for which an employe may properly be discharged is not necessarily misconduct warranting disqualification from unemployment compensation. See, Giese v. Employment Div., 21 Or App 929, 933, 557 P2d 1354 (1976) rev den (1977); Geraths v. Employment Division, 24 Or App 201, 544 P2d 1066 (1976); T. Broden, Law of Social Security and Unemployment Insurance, § 12.01 (1962). While an employer may discharge an employe for any reason,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Giese v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  2. Geraths v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  3. Babcock v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  4. Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975
  5. Romanosky v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975

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