Jackson v. Review Bd. of Indiana Employment Sec. Division, 19816
Decision Date | 27 June 1963 |
Docket Number | No. 1,No. 19816,19816,1 |
Citation | 191 N.E.2d 525,1 Ind.Dec. 604,135 Ind.App. 22 |
Parties | Juanita P. JACKSON, Appellant, v. REVIEW BOARD OF the INDIANA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DIVISION, Douglas J. Morris, David R. Oliver and Frank C. McAlister as Members of and Constituting the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, and Heinz Manufacturing Company, Inc., Appellees |
Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
George W. Brady, Muncie, for appellant.
Edwin K. Steers, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Keith Campbell, Deputy Atty., Gen., for appellee Review Bd.
Leland B. Cross, Jr., Indianapolis, for appellee Heinz Mfg. Co. Inc.; Ross, McCord, Ice & Miller, Indianapolis, of counsel.
This is an appeal from the decision of the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, which found that appellant had been discharged for misconduct in connection with her work and denied unemployment benefits to the appellant.
The statement of facts and findings and conclusions of the Review Board are set out in full as follows:
'That evening, after work, the claimant stopped Jim Leisure in the parking lot and in substance gave him a speech about Congress and the State Legislature and informed him that though he had 'done his dirty work for the company', they were now going to let him go. The claimant contends that she instead told Leisure that during the meeting the superintendent had mentioned that he had two workers in the plating room putting out bad work, but that 'the company was learning to live with it'. She denied she ever spoke to the other employee on the subject. The claimant contends she so advised Mr. Leisure for his own good and benefit. First thing the next morning, when the superintendent entered the plating room, he was accosted by Leisure who inquired as to 'wat the hell was going on'. He said to the superintendent, The employee, Leisure, recounted to the superintendent what this claimant had told him the evening before, i. e., how he had done the company's dirty work and now the company was going to get rid of him. The superintendent explained the true circumstances to Leisure, admonished him not to be upset, and advised him to continue at his work and to forget the matter. The man was so shaken, however, that he was dropping pieces of work and the superintendent ordered the group leader to slow down the plating cycle.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Thompson v. Hygrade Food Products Corp.
...Achenbach v. Review Bd. of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div. (1962), 242 Ind. 655, 660, 179 N.E.2d 873; Jackson v. Review Board of Indiana Emp. Sec. Div. (1963), Ind.App., 1 Ind.Dec. 604, 606, 191 N.E.2d 525, 527; Dawe v. Review Board of Ind. Emp. Sec. Div. (1961), 132 Ind.App. 371, 377, 177 N.E.2d 472; ......
-
Bailey v. Review Bd. of Indiana Dept. of Workforce Development
...to give benefits to those whom the Legislature has determined are not entitled thereto." Jackson v. Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division, 135 Ind.App. 22, 191 N.E.2d 525, 528 (1963). At the time Winder v. Review Board, 528 N.E.2d 854 (Ind.Ct.App.1988) was issued, the leg......
-
General Elec. Co. v. Review Bd. of Indiana Employment Sec. Division.
...event reasonable men would be bound to reach a different conclusion on the evidence in the record. Jackson v. Review Board of Indiana Emp. Sec. Div. (1963), 135 Ind.App. 22, 191 N.E.2d 525. We will not weigh evidence; we consider only that evidence most favorable to the board's decision. De......