Hodges v. Everett, E-81-113
| Decision Date | 17 June 1981 |
| Docket Number | No. E-81-113,E-81-113 |
| Citation | 2 Ark.App. 125,617 S.W.2d 29 |
| Parties | Lora HODGES, Appellant, v. William F. EVERETT, Director of Labor, and Universal Manufacturing Corp., Appellees. |
| Court | Arkansas Court of Appeals |
Appellant Lora M. Hodges applied for unemployment compensation benefits after she was discharged by her employer, Universal Manufacturing Corporation, for being involved in a fight with another employee. The Arkansas Employment Security Division determined that appellant was entitled to benefits under § 5(b)(1) of the Arkansas Employment Security Law, Ark.Stat.Ann. § 81-1106(b)(1) (Repl. 1976), finding that she was attacked physically and tried to defend herself by holding on to her attacker. The decision was appealed to the Appeals Tribunal by the employer. When the employer failed to appear at a hearing before the Appeals Tribunal, the determination of the Agency was affirmed. The employer then appealed to the Board of Review, which, after hearing, found that appellant was disqualified for benefits because she was involved in a fight in willful disregard of the best interests of the employer.
The decision of the Board of Review is reversed.
Section 5(b)(1), supra, provides that an individual shall be disqualified for benefits:
If he is discharged from his last work for misconduct in connection with the work...
The only eyewitness to the incident who testified at the Board of Review hearing was appellant. She stated that on the day of the incident, when it was time to go home, another girl, Della, called appellant by name; that when appellant turned around Della hit appellant on the side of the face with her closed hand and then grabbed appellant's hair. Appellant then grabbed Della's hair, but there is no evidence that appellant hit Della. Appellant testified that she had said nothing to Della, and that there had been no previous argument.
Jeff Luther, the employer's personnel manager, testified that he did not see the fight but that it was reported to him by the foremen. He stated that company policy provided that any time a person is involved in a fight, he will be discharged; if a person is attacked he should not fight back; he can do anything to get away from the attacker, but striking another employee is a dischargeable offense; striking back will result in discharge even if it is done in one's own defense. No effort was made by the employer to determine who struck the first blow, or whether appellant was acting...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Feagin v. Everett, E
...v. Employment Security Division, 3 Ark.App. 281, 625 S.W.2d 551 (1981) (violation of employer's rules on the job); Hodges v. Everett, 2 Ark.App. 125, 617 S.W.2d 29 (1981) (fighting on the job); Reynolds v. Daniels, 1 Ark.App. 262, 614 S.W.2d 525 (1981) (profanity directed toward supervisor)......
-
George's Inc. v. Director, Employment Sec. Dept., E93-259
...in connection with the work." Ark.App.Ann. § 11-10-514 (Supp.1993). As pointed out in the appellee's brief, in Hodges v. Everett, 2 Ark.App. 125, 617 S.W.2d 29 (1981), this court held that it may well be that an employer is justified in having a rule making any employee engaging in a fight ......
-
Millen v. Caldwell, 40983
...672, 675 (1983); Barnett v. Review Bd. of the Indiana Employment Security Div., 419 N.E.2d 249 (Ind.App.1981); Hodges v. Everett, 2 Ark.App. 125, 617 S.W.2d 29, 31 (1981); Matter of Cantrell, 44 N.C.App. 718, 263 S.E.2d 1 (1980); Eastex Packaging Co. v. Dept. of Industry, Labor & Human Rela......
-
ProServe Corp. v. Rainey, 950125
...an unprovoked assault by a coworker, unemployment compensation cannot be denied for fighting on the job. See, e.g., Hodges v. Everett, 2 Ark.App. 125, 617 S.W.2d 29 (1981); Escamilla v. Industrial Com 'n of Colo., 670 P.2d 815 (Colo.Ct.App.1983); Smithson v. Review Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec., 44......