Ex Parte Gadsden Country Club

Like Justice Stuart, I acknowledge the distinction drawn by Justice Bolin in his special concurrence between the issue whether Hurst’s acts constituted “misconduct” for purposes of being disqualified *838from receiving unemployment benefits under § 25-4-78(3) and the issue whether Hurst’s acts constituted a violation of company policy that would serve as a proper basis for terminating his employment. 14 So.3d at 837 (Bolin, J., concurring specially and citing Ex parte Sargent, 634 So.2d 1008,1010 (Ala.1993)).

In addition, there is the distinction between an administrative adjudication of the issue…