Legal Opinion · Dissent

R.D. v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided December 16, 2010No. 93A02-1005-EX-559Published

1DissentBaker, Chief Judge

I respectfully dissent and must part ways with the majority's determination that the Review Board erred in denying R.D.'s application for training at the Art Institute. As the majority observes, we will reverse the Board's decision only if there is no substantial evidence to support the findings. Quakenbush v. Rev. Bd. of Ind. Dep't of Workforce Dev., 891 N.E.2d 1051, 1054 (Ind.Ct.App.2008). Moreover, because R.D. is appealing from a negative judgment, we will not reverse the Review Board's judgment unless it is contrary to law. Frye v. Vigo Cnty., 769 N.E.2d 188, 192 (Ind.Ct.App.2002).

20…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Quakenbush v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce DevelopmentIndiana Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. Frye v. Vigo CountyIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
  3. Creps v. Idaho Department of LaborIdaho Supreme Court · 2010

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

Powered by the Exa API