Legal Opinion · Dissent

Erne v. Employment Division

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided November 13, 1991No. 90-AB-1284; CA A66524Published

1DissentRiggs, J.

I disagree with the majority’s view that EAB’s findings rationally support its conclusion that claimant’s off-duty conduct was work-connected. The incident leading to claimant’s discharge occurred off the job site and after hours and was unrelated to claimant’s job or to employer’s business. Although the incident may have justified employer’s discharge of claimant, it does not disqualify him from receiving unemployment benefits, because it was not “misconduct connected with work” under ORS 657.176(2)(a).

First, contrary to the majority’s assertion, the last chance agreement does not support…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Veneer v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  2. Muscatell v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
  3. Flaucher v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988

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

Powered by the Exa API