Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Mail-Well Envelope Co. v. Employment Division

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided September 6, 1989No. 88-AB-956; CA A49152Published

1ConcurrenceJoseph, C. J.

This case was submitted without oral argument. Only employer filed a brief. Either the majority mistakes the length of that brief as a measure of quality, or it got a different brief than I did. Despite what the majority says, employer’s assignments of error do not attack any of EAB’s findings of fact as not being supported by substantial evidence, see, e.g., Claimant Members of Boilermakers v. Emp. Div., 73 Or App 470, 699 P2d 203, rev den 299 Or 583, 704 P2d 513 (1985), and do not support a claim that EAB’s reasoning from the facts found to its conclusions is unsound. See Home Plate, Inc.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. Asten-Hill Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
  2. McPherson v. Employment DivisionOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Home Plate, Inc. v. Oregon Liquor Control CommissionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1975
  4. Members of Boilermakers Local 72 v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985

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

Powered by the Exa API