Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Kidde

Filed: April 6, 1982.

IN THE MATTER OF: WALTER KIDDE & COMPANY, INC., POST OFFICE BOX 509, MEBANE, NORTH CAROLINA 27302
v.
JACK D. BRADSHAW, ROUTE, 1, BOX 365, MEBANE, NORTH CAROLINA 27302, SS. NO. 243-70-8340, DOCKET NO. 4235 G; ED FISHER, ROUTE 8, BOX 123, BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27215, SS. NO. 164-44-7593, DOCKET NO. 4242 G; GRADY L. HUNDLEY, ROUTE 2, BOX 576, GRAHAM, NORTH CAROLINA 27253, SS. NO. 228-28-0475, DOCKET NO. 4247 G; DAVID A. TUTTLE, ROUTE 8, BOX 165, BURLINGTON, NORTH CAROLINA 27215, SS. NO. 246-84-3231, DOCKET NO. 4277 G; AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY COMMISSION OF NORTH CAROLINA, POST OFFICE BOX 25903, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27611



Appeal by employer from McLelland, Judge. Judgment entered 16 March 1981 in Superior Court, Alamance County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 13 January 1982.

Morris, Chief Judge. Judges Vaughn and Martin (Harry C.) concur.

Morris

The sole issue on appeal is whether claimants, were discharged because of misconduct associated with their work and are thus disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits.

Findings of fact of the Commission are conclusive if supported by the evidence, and judicial review is limited to determining whether errors of law have been committed. G.S. 96-15(i). The findings of fact to which appellant excepts are as follows:

5. The employer alleged they were discharged as a result of having found gambling for money while on company property and during a work day.

6. Each of the parties (claimants) involved denies having done any gambling for money. Each party (claimant) does agree that they were playing cards for a game or two, but not with any betting for money involved. Someone had found an incomplete deck of cards and while waiting for job assignments the four claimants fooled around playing a hand or two of cards.

7. The claimants were not playing cards for money and were not therefore gambling as the employer alleged. An employer witness stated that he thought they were gambling, but had not seen any money being passed. He had only observed washers on what might have been used as a card table.

We hold that these findings are fully supported by the testimony given at the hearing and reflected in the record. The findings of fact are, therefore, binding on appeal.

We hold, furthermore, that the facts support the Commission's conclusion that the claimants were not discharged for misconduct in connection with their work.

An employee will be disqualified for benefits if it is determined that he was discharged for misconduct connected with his work. G.S. 96-14(2). "Misconduct" as that word is used in unemployment compensation law has been defined as

In Re Collingsworth, 17 N.C. App. 340, 343-44, 194 S.E.2d 210, 212-13 (1973), quoting Boynton Cab Company v. Neubeck, 237 Wis. 249, 259, 296 N.W. 636, 640 (1941), where the Wisconsin Court noted that "mere inefficiency, unsatisfactory conduct . . . are not to be deemed 'misconduct' . . .". Id. at 260, 296 N.W. at 640. The facts support ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.