| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
criminal acts |
|
|
Summary:
While misconduct is not to be assumed simply because criminal charges have been laid, it must also be remembered that the ultimate dismissal of the charges do not necessarily prove that misconduct has not occurred. The question of criminal guilt is not before the Board.
The Board allowed the case because the Commission and the employer had been unable to prove the criminal charges against claimant because the trial had not yet taken place. This is clearly an error of law. PERUSSE referred to. Findings of court not determinative of misconduct.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
errors in law |
burden of proof |
|
Summary:
The Board allowed the case because the Commission and the employer had been unable to prove the criminal charges against claimant because the trial had not yet taken place. This is clearly an error of law. PERUSSE referred to. Findings of court not determinative of misconduct.
