Ackley v. Employment Division

Court of Appeals of Oregon

Ackley v. Employment Division

727 P.2d 980, 82 Or. App. 413

CourtCourt of Appeals of Oregon

DecidedNovember 12, 1986

DocketEAB 86-AB-110, 86-AB-110A; CA A39409

StatusPublished

This text of 727 P.2d 980 (Ackley v. Employment Division) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ackley v. Employment Division, 727 P.2d 980, 82 Or. App. 413 (Or. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM

At the time of the hearing in this unemployment compensation case, petitioner’s status was that of an employe discharged for misconduct connected with the work. ORS 657.176(2)(a). The referee found facts that would support the conclusion that petitioner was disqualified for benefits for that reason.

Following the hearing, the employer notified the Employment Division that, as a result of a grievance proceeding under the company’s collective bargaining agreement, petitioner’s status had been changed from that of a discharged employe to one who was on indefinite layoff and that the employer agreed that petitioner was entitled to unemployment compensation.

It does not appear from EAB’s order on review that it considered the employer’s letter. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the Board with instructions to consider that letter, which could not have been presented at the hearing before the referee. See ORS 183.484(5).

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI