Spruell v. Administrator of the Division of Employment Security of the Department of Labor

Louisiana Court of Appeal

Spruell v. Administrator of the Division of Employment Security of the Department of Labor

158 So. 2d 364, 1963 La. App. LEXIS 2094

CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal

DecidedNovember 1, 1963

DocketNo. 10028

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 158 So. 2d 364 (Spruell v. Administrator of the Division of Employment Security of the Department of Labor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Spruell v. Administrator of the Division of Employment Security of the Department of Labor, 158 So. 2d 364, 1963 La. App. LEXIS 2094 (La. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

HARDY, Judge.

Plaintiff filed a judicial appeal from the decision of the Board of Review of the defendant agency denying unemployment compensation. Defendant appeals from judgment awarding compensation.

The transcript before us discloses that on original hearing the defendant agency disqualified claimant for benefits, which conclusion was affirmed by the Appeals Referee and the Board of Review. Upon application for judicial review, the claimant presented evidence with reference to a respiratory affection allegedly caused by working conditions existing in her place of employment by Haynesville Manufacturing Company. On judicial appeal the district court ordered the case remanded for the taking of evidence as to plaintiff’s physical condition. The claim was again refused by defendant agency and on a subsequent judicial appeal the trial court reversed this finding and recognized plaintiff as being eligible for unemployment benefits.

The facts established by evidence tendered by claimant on the hearing before defendant agency, after remand of this case, adequately justified the conclusion that plaintiff was forced to discontinue her employment because of her physical condition which directly resulted therefrom. For this reason it is clear that the judgment appealed from was fully justified and, accordingly, it is ordered that said judgment be and it is hereby affirmed.

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

HARDY, Judge.

Plaintiff filed a judicial appeal from the decision of the Board of Review of the defendant agency denying unemployment compensation. Defendant appeals from judgment awarding compensation.

The transcript before us discloses that on original hearing the defendant agency disqualified claimant for benefits, which conclusion was affirmed by the Appeals Referee and the Board of Review. Upon application for judicial review, the claimant presented evidence with reference to a respiratory affection allegedly caused by working conditions existing in her place of employment by Haynesville Manufacturing Company. On judicial appeal the district court ordered the case remanded for the taking of evidence as to plaintiff’s physical condition. The claim was again refused by defendant agency and on a subsequent judicial appeal the trial court reversed this finding and recognized plaintiff as being eligible for unemployment benefits.

The facts established by evidence tendered by claimant on the hearing before defendant agency, after remand of this case, adequately justified the conclusion that plaintiff was forced to discontinue her employment because of her physical condition which directly resulted therefrom. For this reason it is clear that the judgment appealed from was fully justified and, accordingly, it is ordered that said judgment be and it is hereby affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 So. 2d 364, 1963 La. App. LEXIS 2094, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spruell-v-administrator-of-the-division-of-employment-security-of-the-lactapp-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack