| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| misconduct |
criminal acts |
|
|
Summary:
The claimant had been dismissed for failing to report for work because of his imprisonment. He had been falsely accused by his former spouse and the charges against him had been dropped. The claimant had not been able to obtain a bond because he was already on probation. The Umpire sated that, whether the imprisonment resulted from the most recent charge brought against him or an earlier charge, which had led to his being on probation, the claimant nonetheless had been prevented from reporting for work because of his own actions, and the judge ruled that the claimant had lost his job as a result of misconduct.
