Legal Opinion

Duperry v. Administrator

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided December 3, 1964No. File 27451PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCotter, J.

The employer, Beacon Motors, appeals from a decision of the commissioner affirming a decision of the examiner that the claimant under the act was not guilty of wilful misconduct within Gen eral Statutes § 31-236 (2) (b) and, therefore, the statutory disqualification should not be imposed. This section provides in part: “An individual shall be ineligible for benefits ... (2) during the week in which, in the opinion of the administrator, he has ...(b) been discharged for wilful misconduct in the course of his employment, and for the next four following weeks . . . .” The claim of the appellant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Cassar v. Employment Security CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Rasmussen v. Gem State Packing CompanyIdaho Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Detroit Gravure Corp. v. Employment Security CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1962

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hannon v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation ActConnecticut Superior Court · 1970
  2. Eddins v. Chippewa Springs Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  3. Latina v. Administrator, Unemployment Comp. Act, No. 564559 (Jan. 26, 1998)Connecticut Superior Court · 1998
  4. Sickle Cell Association v. Administrator, No. Cv-00-0445358-S (May 30, 2002)Connecticut Superior Court · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API