| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
proof |
|
|
Summary:
Plainly it is for the CEIC to prove misconduct beyond reasonable doubt; if it cannot discharge this burden, insured must plainly have the benefit. CEIC has not discharged burden in this case.
Completely inconsistent evidence. Without giving reason, board accepted version of employer who passed on opinions of 3 employees where were not called or identified. Too much weight was in fact given to something that did not merit any.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
weight of statements |
hearsay |
|
Summary:
While according to MILLS the board may admit and accept hearsay evidence, it must still be conclusive and consistent with the admissions of the person reporting it. Hearsay reported by the employer inconsistent with employer's own account.
