James River Corp. v. Employment Division
Court of Appeals of Oregon
1Opinion of the CourtRichardson, P. J.
Claimant was discharged for being intoxicated while at work at employer’s paper mill. His condition was the culmination of a day of heavy drinking which preceded his reporting to work. Employer seeks review of EAB’s decision that, because claimant is an alcoholic, his misconduct was not “wilful,” ORS 657.176(2)(a); OAR 471-30-038(3), and he is therefore entitled to unemployment compensation. We reverse and remand.
EAB reasoned:
“We would point out that our affirmation [of the referee] is based upon our conclusion that the claimant was an alcoholic and had no control over his drinking. His…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Christensen v. Employment DivivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
- Erickson v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1977
- Gething v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1984
- Kaeding v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1985
- Dean v. Guard Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 1987
3Cited by4 opinions
- Steele v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
- City of Portland v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1988
- Portland General Electric Co. v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1989
- Barrera v. Employment Dept.Court of Appeals of Oregon · 2024