Minn. Stat. § 268.09

Houston v. International Data Transfer Corp. · 2002 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

Lolling v. Midwest Patrol · 1996 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Tuff v. Knitcraft Corp. · 1995 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Prickett v. Circuit Science, Inc. · 1994 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Valenty v. Medical Concepts Development, Inc. · 1993 8 citations

The court of appeals reversed, holding that respondent was able to work between October 4 and 15, 1991, and that she was not disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits after leaving her job at Medical Concepts within a short time because the job was not “suitable” under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 2 (1992). The question of whether the Medical Concepts job was “suitable” was not considered until the case was heard by the court of appeals. Nevertheless, the court of appeals considered the issue. The Commissioner apparently does not now argue that the job was indeed “suitable,” under Minn. Stat. § 268.-09, subd. 2, only that its “suitability” is irrelevant where there is a voluntary quit.

The court of appeals reversed, holding that respondent was able to work between October 4 and 15, 1991, and that she was not disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits after leaving her job at Medical Concepts within a short time because the job was not “suitable” under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 2 (1992). The question of whether the Medical Concepts job was “suitable” was not considered until the case was heard by the court of appeals. Nevertheless, the court of appeals considered the issue. The Commissioner apparently does not now argue that the job was indeed “suitable,” under Minn. Stat. § 268.-09, subd. 2, only that its “suitability” is irrelevant where there is a voluntary quit.

The court of appeals reversed, holding that respondent was able to work between October 4 and 15, 1991, and that she was not disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits after leaving her job at Medical Concepts within a short time because the job was not “suitable” under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 2 (1992). The question of whether the Medical Concepts job was “suitable” was not considered until the case was heard by the court of appeals. Nevertheless, the court of appeals considered the issue. The Commissioner apparently does not now argue that the job was indeed “suitable,” under Minn. Stat. § 268.-09, subd. 2, only that its “suitability” is irrelevant where there is a voluntary quit.

+ 5 more citations in this opinion.

Pechacek v. Minnesota State Lottery · 1993 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Markel v. City of Circle Pines · 1992 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Ress v. Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Inc. · 1989 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Geo. A. Hormel & Co. v. Asper · 1988 5 citations

+ 5 more citations in this opinion.

McGowan v. Executive Express Transportation Enterprises, Inc. · 1988 5 citations

The commissioner’s representative concluded that relator’s refusal constituted misconduct under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, *593 subd. 1(2) (1984). The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed in a split decision. The majority concluded: (1) the findings of the commissioner reasonably support the conclusion that relator’s actions constituted misconduct connected with work and (2) the employer’s request to pick up the prescription was reasonable under these circumstances. The dissent concluded that relator’s conduct did not establish the culpability necessary for disqualification under either the statute or Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co., 295 Minn. 372, 204 N.W.2d 644 (1973). McGowan appeals. We affirm.

The commissioner’s representative concluded that relator’s refusal constituted misconduct under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, *593 subd. 1(2) (1984). The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed in a split decision. The majority concluded: (1) the findings of the commissioner reasonably support the conclusion that relator’s actions constituted misconduct connected with work and (2) the employer’s request to pick up the prescription was reasonable under these circumstances. The dissent concluded that relator’s conduct did not establish the culpability necessary for disqualification under either the statute or Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co., 295 Minn. 372, 204 N.W.2d 644 (1973). McGowan appeals. We affirm.

The commissioner’s representative concluded that relator’s refusal constituted misconduct under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, *593 subd. 1(2) (1984). The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed in a split decision. The majority concluded: (1) the findings of the commissioner reasonably support the conclusion that relator’s actions constituted misconduct connected with work and (2) the employer’s request to pick up the prescription was reasonable under these circumstances. The dissent concluded that relator’s conduct did not establish the culpability necessary for disqualification under either the statute or Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co., 295 Minn. 372, 204 N.W.2d 644 (1973). McGowan appeals. We affirm.

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

McNabb v. Cub Foods · 1984 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Sticka v. Holiday Village South · 1984 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Leslin v. County of Hennepin · 1984 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Colburn v. Pine Portage Madden Bros., Inc. · 1984 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Windsperger v. Broadway Liquor Outlet · 1984 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

Sticha v. McDonald's No. 291 · 1984 5 citations

+ 5 more citations in this opinion.

Marty v. Digital Equipment Corp. · 1984 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Mortel v. IND. SCH. DIST. NO. 831, FOREST LAKE · 1983 6 citations

This matter is before the court for review on a writ of certiorari from an order of the Commissioner of Economic Security denying unemployment compensation benefits to relators. Relators, 19 full-time bus drivers for Independent School District No. 831, were laid off on Tuesday, October 27, 1981, when district teachers went on strike. Re-lators did not participate in or have a direct interest in the strike. They filed claims for unemployment benefits on the first day of the layoff. The teachers’ strike was settled, and relators returned to work on Monday, November 16, 1981. The sole issue presented is whether the commissioner was correct in holding that relators’ “disqualification week” under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 3 (1982), commenced on November 1, 1981, the Sunday after the week in which the strike and layoff began, rather than on Tuesday, October 27, 1981, the first day of the strike and layoff. 1

This matter is before the court for review on a writ of certiorari from an order of the Commissioner of Economic Security denying unemployment compensation benefits to relators. Relators, 19 full-time bus drivers for Independent School District No. 831, were laid off on Tuesday, October 27, 1981, when district teachers went on strike. Re-lators did not participate in or have a direct interest in the strike. They filed claims for unemployment benefits on the first day of the layoff. The teachers’ strike was settled, and relators returned to work on Monday, November 16, 1981. The sole issue presented is whether the commissioner was correct in holding that relators’ “disqualification week” under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 3 (1982), commenced on November 1, 1981, the Sunday after the week in which the strike and layoff began, rather than on Tuesday, October 27, 1981, the first day of the strike and layoff. 1

This matter is before the court for review on a writ of certiorari from an order of the Commissioner of Economic Security denying unemployment compensation benefits to relators. Relators, 19 full-time bus drivers for Independent School District No. 831, were laid off on Tuesday, October 27, 1981, when district teachers went on strike. Re-lators did not participate in or have a direct interest in the strike. They filed claims for unemployment benefits on the first day of the layoff. The teachers’ strike was settled, and relators returned to work on Monday, November 16, 1981. The sole issue presented is whether the commissioner was correct in holding that relators’ “disqualification week” under Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 3 (1982), commenced on November 1, 1981, the Sunday after the week in which the strike and layoff began, rather than on Tuesday, October 27, 1981, the first day of the strike and layoff. 1

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

White v. Metropolitan Medical Center · 1983 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Kabes v. Middleton · 1982 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Jansen v. PEOPLES ELEC. CO., INC. · 1982 12 citations

+ 12 more citations in this opinion.

RESERVE MIN. CO., BABBITT DIV. v. Gorecki · 1982 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

Smith v. Employers' Overload Co. · 1981 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Berzac v. Marsden Building Maintenance Co. · 1981 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Sunstar Foods, Inc. v. Uhlendorf · 1981 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Lopez v. Owatonna Manufacturing Co. · 1981 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Brown v. Port of Sunnyside Club, Inc. · 1981 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Auger v. Gillette Co. · 1981 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Hendrickson v. Northfield Cleaners · 1980 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Commissioner of Minnesota Department of Economic Security v. City of Duluth · 1980 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Loftis v. Legionville School Safety Patrol Training Center, Inc. · 1980 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Thurik v. Department of Economic Security · 1980 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Christine M. Berglund, Relator v. Kozlak's Royal Oak Rest Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development · 2015 1 citation

misconduct is ineligible for unemployment benefits. Minn. Stat. § 268.095, subds. 4, 6

Melinda DeHoop, Relator v. Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Department of Employment and Economic Development · 2014 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Cynthia Stephen, Relator v. Pro Pilots, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development · 2014 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Potter v. Northern Empire Pizza, Inc. · 2011 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Erb v. Commissioner of Economic Security · 1999 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Brula v. St. Louis County · 1999 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Kehoe v. Minnesota Department of Economic Security · 1997 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Kalberg v. Park & Recreation Board of Minneapolis · 1997 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Scheunemann v. Radisson South Hotel · 1997 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Posch v. St. Otto's Home · 1997 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Haskins v. Choice Auto Rental, Inc. · 1997 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Hein v. Gresen Division · 1996 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Cook v. Playworks · 1996 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Decker v. City Pages, Inc. · 1995 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Lolling v. Midwest Patrol · 1995 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Lotspeich v. Alliance Health Services · 1995 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Fujan v. RUFFRIDGE-JOHNSON EQUIPMENT · 1995 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Romanowicz v. Consolidated Freightways Corp. · 1995 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Loewen v. Lakeland Mental Health Center, Inc. · 1995 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Whitehead v. Moonlight Nursing Care, Inc. · 1995 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Dachel v. Ortho Met, Inc. · 1995 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Ballin v. Metropolitan Transit Commission · 1994 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Denny v. Minneapolis American Indian Center · 1994 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Goodwin v. BPS Guard Services, Inc. · 1994 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Tuff v. Knitcraft Corp. · 1994 2 citations

An individual who is discharged from a job for misconduct is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits. Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 1(b) (1992). “Misconduct” is

An individual who is discharged from a job for misconduct is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits. Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 1(b) (1992). “Misconduct” is

Baron v. Lens Crafters, Inc. · 1994 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Peksa v. Fairview-Southdale Hosp. · 1994 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Peksa v. Fairview-Southdale Hospital · 1994 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Shell v. Host International (Corp.) · 1994 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Dorn v. Peterson · 1994 1 citation

Peterson’s statements were material and pertinent to the unemployment compensation hearing. The information in Peterson’s letters stated his grounds for discharging Dorn and Hoerr, and the scope of the statements does not exceed what would be relevant to making a determination on benefits. See Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 1(a), (b), (d) (1990) (identifying grounds for disqualification of benefits); see also Jenson, 273 Minn. at 393, 141 N.W.2d at 490 (all doubts must be resolved in favor of finding statements pertinent).

Hanke v. Safari Hair Adventure · 1994 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Forester v. Value Travel, Inc. · 1993 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Redalen v. Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co. · 1993 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Prickett v. Circuit Science, Inc. · 1993 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Soussi v. Blue & White Service Corp. · 1993 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Shanahan v. District Memorial Hospital · 1993 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Peterson v. Fred Vogt & Co. · 1993 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Miller v. International Express Corp. · 1993 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Eide v. Project for Pride in Living · 1992 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Mitchell v. Crookston Welding MacHine Co. · 1992 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Wilson v. Comfort Bus Co., Inc. · 1992 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Valenty v. Medical Concepts Development, Inc. · 1992 12 citations

+ 12 more citations in this opinion.

Hayes v. Wrico Stamping Griffiths Corp. · 1992 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Wood v. Menard, Inc. · 1992 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Vejdani v. Western Temporary Services, Inc. · 1992 1 citation

Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 2 (1990).

Parnell v. River Bend Carriers, Inc. · 1992 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Hansen v. C.W. Mears, Inc. · 1992 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

Polley v. Gopher Bearing Co. · 1991 10 citations

+ 10 more citations in this opinion.

Weaver v. Minnesota Valley Laboratories, Inc. · 1991 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Heaser v. Lerch, Bates & Associates Inc. · 1991 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Markel v. City of Circle Pines · 1991 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

McCourtney v. Imprimis Technology, Inc. · 1991 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

Riley v. Transport Corp. of America, Inc. · 1990 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Lemmerman v. ETA Systems, Inc. · 1990 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Prescott v. Moorhead State University · 1990 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Nelson v. Star Tribune · 1989 1 citation

Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 1(b) (1988) provides that an individual is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits if he is discharged for misconduct. In Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co., 295 Minn. 372, 204 N.W.2d 644 (1973), the Minnesota Supreme Court defined “misconduct” as follows:

Ress v. Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Inc. · 1989 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Fiskewold v. HM Smyth Co., Inc. · 1989 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Hawthorne v. Universal Studios, Inc. · 1988 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Minchew v. Minnesota Odd Fellows Home · 1988 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Wetterhahn v. Kimm Co. · 1988 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

Eyler v. Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. · 1988 1 citation

Minn. Stat. § 268.09, subd. 1(b) (Supp.1987), provides that an individual who is discharged for misconduct is disqualified from receiving waiting-week credit and unemployment compensation. “Misconduct” is defined as

Biegner v. Bloomington Chrysler/Plymouth, Inc. · 1988 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Cherry v. American National Insurance Co. · 1988 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Gradine v. College of St. Scholastica · 1988 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

Souder v. Ziegler, Inc., Buhl Location · 1988 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Reed v. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Golden Valley, District 5 · 1988 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

Anderson v. Honeywell, Inc. · 1988 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.