Legal Opinion

Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board v. Lecuyer

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 3, 1990No. C0-90-81Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RANDALL, Judge.

The Department of Jobs and Training determined that respondent Leo LeCuyer was entitled to receive unemployment benefits for periods when he was not working but was receiving compensation previously earned and set aside by his employer in a special account. We reverse.

FACTS

Respondent Leo LeCuyer was employed as a mobile equipment operator for relator Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board (“Park Board”). LeCuyer was a full-time permanent intermittment worker, “on call” to do work when it was available.

The terms of a collective bargaining agreement between LeCuyer’s union…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. White v. Metropolitan Medical CenterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  2. In Re Adoption of AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
  3. McGowan v. Executive Express Transportation Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  4. Stearns-Hotzfield v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  5. Novitsky v. Department of Natural ResourcesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982

1 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