Summary of Issue: Oral Or Written

Decision A-1044.96 Full Text of Decision A-1044.96

Umpire criticized the BOR for having ignored the claimant’s written statements and only considered the explanations that the claimant gave at the hearing. FCA found that this criticism was unjustified because the stenographic notes indicate that the BOR confronted the claimant with his written statements before accepting his oral explanations. Consequently, the Umpire could not find that the BOR had ignored the written statements.

Decision 25135 Full Text of Decision 25135

The fact that the board of referees chose to concede more credibility to the employer's written statement than to the claimant's oral deposition does not constitute an error in law. The board is the trier of facts and the documents on file allowed it to decide accordingly.

Decision 23544 Full Text of Decision 23544

While direct testimony (claimant at hearing) before the primary finder of fact is generally to be preferred in such matters (misconduct), the Board is not bound by legal and technical rules of evidence. It was entitled to rely on the evidence that it chose to believe (written statement from others).

Decision 15734 Full Text of Decision 15734

A written document is better evidence than a thousand verbal statements. There is also a rule of evidence to the effect that it is only by exception that oral evidence can contradict written evidence.

Decision 12707 Full Text of Decision 12707

Generally, written assertions of facts, about which the writer has never been directly questioned by the Board, will carry less weight than oral evidence presented with respect to that fact.