Legal Opinion
Clearfield City v. Department of Employment Security
Utah Supreme Court
Decided March 30, 1983No. 18388PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OAKS, Justice:
This action to review a decision of the Board of Review of the Department of Employment Security turns on the meaning of a 1979 amendment to U.C.A., 1953, § 35-4-5(b)(1), relating to eligibility after a discharge for misconduct.
Since the original enactment of the Employment Security Act in 1941, an employee has been ineligible for unemployment compensation benefits when “discharged for misconduct connected with his work .... ” 1941 Utah Laws, ch. 40, § 5. Such provisions are common. See generally 76 Am. Jur.2d Unemployment Compensation §§ 52-58 (1975); Annot. 89 A.L.R.2d 1089…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Boynton Cab Co. v. NeubeckWisconsin Supreme Court · 1941
- Utah Department of Administrative Services v. Public Service CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1983
- O'NEAL v. Employment Security AgencyIdaho Supreme Court · 1965
- Employment Security Board v. LeCatesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1958
- Gregory v. AndersonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Morton International, Inc. v. Auditing Division of the Utah State Tax CommissionUtah Supreme Court · 1991
- Hurley v. Board of Review of the Industrial Commission of Utah, Department of Employment SecurityUtah Supreme Court · 1988
- Johnson v. Department of Employment SecurityCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1989
- Pro-Benefit Staffing, Inc. v. Board of Review of the Industrial CommissionCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1989
- Trotta v. Department of Employment SecurityUtah Supreme Court · 1983
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.