Legal Opinion

Palmer v. Arkansas Employment Security Division

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided April 23, 1979No. 78-318PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Frank Holt, Justice.

Appellee’s Board of Review determined that appellant was liable for contributions under the State Employment Security Law. The trial court affirmed. Appellant first asserts that the court erred in sustaining the Board’s ruling inasmuch as there was no evidence to support a finding that appellant paid wages, for services performed, to individual beauty operators. We must agree.

The facts are undisputed. Appellant leases the property in which Palmer’s Boutique is located. She owns all the beauty shop equipment and pays the janitorial and utility bills. She is not a beautician…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. McCain, Comm. of Labor v. Crossett Lumber CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1943
  2. Hervey v. Construction Helicopters, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1972

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Home Care Professionals of Arkansas, Inc. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2006
  2. Home Care Professionals of Arkansas, Inc. v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2006
  3. SCI, Inc. v. Director, Department of Workforce ServicesCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API