Legal Opinion

Veneer v. Employment Division

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Decided January 16, 1991No. 89-AB-1056; CA A62039PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*200RIGGS, J.

The Employment Appeals Board held that claimant’s discharge was not for “misconduct connected with work,” ORS 657.176(2)(a); OAR 471-030-038(3), and that he is therefore entitled to receive unemployment benefits. Employer seeks review, and we affirm.

EAB found that claimant worked for employer from 1979 to 1989 and was last employed as a chipper operator. In 1987, while working for employer, claimant submitted to a drug test and tested positive for methamphetamines. As a condition of continued employment, he agreed to participate in a rehabilitation program at employer’s expense and…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Springfield Education Ass'n v. Springfield School District No. 19Oregon Supreme Court · 1980
  2. McPherson v. Employment DivisionOregon Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Trebesch v. Employment DivisionOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Employment Division, Department of Human Resources v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  5. Oliver v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1979

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Steele v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1996
  2. Johnson v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003
  3. American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Organizations v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. Erne v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1991
  5. Johnson v. Employment DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2003

17 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