Miller Brewing Co. v. Carlson
| Decision Date | 09 April 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 63579,63579 |
| Citation | 162 Ga.App. 94,290 S.E.2d 200 |
| Parties | MILLER BREWING COMPANY v. CARLSON. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Jessee W. Walters, Albany, Donald B. Harden, Weyman T. Johnson, Jr., Atlanta, for appellant.
Donald A. Sweat, Jesse C. Stone, Albany, Michael J. Bowers, Atty. Gen., Atlanta, for appellee.
Petitioner was discharged as an employee of defendant Miller Brewing Company. The Board of Review of the Employment Security Agency, Department of Labor, found that she was disqualified for benefits by Code Ann. § 54-610(b) (). On appeal, the trial judge determined there was no probative evidence that the petitioner was discharged for a disqualifying reason showing fault within the definition of Smith v. Caldwell, 142 Ga.App. 130, 235 S.E.2d 547.
After grant of an application for discretionary appeal, we now consider the correctness of that ruling. Held :
Code Ann. § 54-616 () provides: "The manner in which appealed claims shall be presented, and the conduct of hearings and appeals shall be in accordance with regulations prescribed by the commissioner for determining the rights of the parties, whether or not such regulations conform to common law or statutory rules of evidence and other technical rules of procedure." Our Supreme Court in its interpretation of this section held as follows: Huiet, Commissioner, et al. v. Schwob Manufacturing Co., 196 Ga. 855, 860, 27 S.E.2d 743.
Without question, and as both sides concede, in passing upon the sufficiency of the evidence considered by the administrative tribunal, the trial court, as well as this court, is bound by the "any evidence" rule. Johnson v. Caldwell, 148 Ga.App. 617(1), 251 S.E.2d 837; ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bulloch Academy v. Cornett, 74330
...of an administrative agency, a superior court, as well as this court, is bound by the "any evidence" rule. See Miller Brewing Co. v. Carlson, 162 Ga.App. 94, 290 S.E.2d 200 (1982); Moore v. Tanner, supra. Accordingly, the sole issue for resolution is whether there was "any evidence" to supp......
-
Skinner v. Thurmond
...both the superior court and this court must affirm that decision if it is supported by any evidence. Miller Brewing Co. v. Carlson, 162 Ga.App. 94, 95, 290 S.E.2d 200 (1982). Under OCGA § 34-8-194(2)(A), no unemployment benefits due to an individual who is fired "for failure to obey orders,......
-
Lamb v. Tanner, 72046
...We agree. Although the "any evidence" rule applies to findings of fact by the administrative tribunal, Miller Brewing Co. v. Carlson, 162 Ga.App. 94, 95, 290 S.E.2d 200 (1982), the record offers no evidence contrary to appellant's contention that the overages and shortages occurred despite ......
-
Teal v. Thurmond
...and the court must affirm the decision of the Board if it is supported by any competent evidence. See Miller Brewing Co. v. Carlson, 162 Ga.App. 94, 95, 290 S.E.2d 200 (1982) (evidence must have probative value). It is settled, however, that hearsay is not competent evidence and “is without......