Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
11 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1946–1978 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Cassar v. Employment Security Commissiongreen2 sentences1963Since Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, 343 Mich 380 , we have followed the definition of “misconduct” formulated by the Wisconsin supreme court in Boynton Cab Company v. Neubeck, 237 Wis 249, 259, 260 ( 296 NW 636 ), and which appears in 48 Am Jur, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, and Retirement Funds, § 38, pp 541, 542: “ Misconduct within the meaning of an unemployment compensation act excluding from its benefits an employee discharged for misconduct must be an act of wanton or wilful disregard of the employer’s interest, a deliberate violation of the employer’s rules, a dis 1962In our opinion in Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, 343 Mich 380, 405 , in considering the scope of the term “misconduct” as used in the statute before us, we cited the following statement from 48' Am Jur, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance,, and Retirement Funds, § 38 pp 541, 542: “ ‘Misconduct within the meaning of an unemployment compensation act excluding from its benefits an employee discharged for misconduct must be an act of wanton or wilful disregard of the employer’s interest, a deliberate violation of the employer’s rules, a disregard of standards of .behavior which the | 1 | 4 |
Bell v. Employment Security Commissiongreen2 sentences1962In Bell v. Employment Security Commission, 359 Mich 649 , this Court held that an employee who was so unmindful of his duties and obligations to his employer as to permit himself to sleep or doze while *539 employed as a fireman was guilty of misconduct barring his right to unemployment compensation following his discharge. 1962In Bell v. Employment Security Commission, 359 Mich 649 , this Court held that an employee who was so unmindful of his duties and obligations to his employer as to permit himself to sleep or doze while employed as a fireman was gnilty of misconduct barring Ms right to unemployment compensation following his discharge. | 1 | 2 |
In Re McLeodgreen1 sentence1976See In re McLeod, supra. The Court could see no prejudice to defendant and dismissed his writ of habeas corpus. | 1 | 1 |
Detroit Gravure Corp. v. Employment Security Commissiongreen1 sentence1966See Detroit Gravure Corporation v. Employment Security Commission (1962), 366 Mich 530, 533 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Boynton Cab Co. v. Neubeck
green
2 sentences1963Since Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, 343 Mich 380 , we have followed the definition of “misconduct” formulated by the Wisconsin supreme court in Boynton Cab Company v. Neubeck, 237 Wis 249, 259, 260 ( 296 NW 636 ), and which appears in 48 Am Jur, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, and Retirement Funds, § 38, pp 541, 542: “ Misconduct within the meaning of an unemployment compensation act excluding from its benefits an employee discharged for misconduct must be an act of wanton or wilful disregard of the employer’s interest, a deliberate violation of the employer’s rules, a dis 1955Based on the conclusions reached the following statement as to the meaning of the term is set forth in 48 Am Jur, Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, and Retirement Funds, § 38, pp 541, 542: “Misconduct within the meaning of an unemployment compensation act excluding from its benefits an employee discharged for misconduct must be an act of wanton or wilful disregard of the employer’s interest, a deliberate violation of the employer’s rules, a disregard of standards of behavior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or negligence in such degree or recurrence as to mani | 4 | 1955–1963 |
People v. Kachar
green
2 sentences1978"And, besides, the limited suppression ordered here may have a deterrent effect on the police and prosecution desired by the Supreme Court, because the photographic line-up was improper, although I don’t think it was a deliberate violation of their rights to counsel [sic], ” (Emphasis supplied.) In People v Kachar, 400 Mich 78, 95-97 ; 252 NW2d 807 (1977), the Michigan Supreme Court identified factors to be used in determining whether a witness’s in-court identification is fruit of an improper pretrial identification. 1978"And, besides, the limited suppression ordered here may have a deterrent effect on the police and prosecution desired by the Supreme Court, because the photographic line-up was improper, although I don’t think it was a deliberate violation of their rights to counsel [sic], ” (Emphasis supplied.) In People v Kachar, 400 Mich 78, 95-97 ; 252 NW2d 807 (1977), the Michigan Supreme Court identified factors to be used in determining whether a witness’s in-court identification is fruit of an improper pretrial identification. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Fresta v. Miller
neutral
1 sentence1971Fresta v. Miller (1967), 7 Mich App 58 . | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Wickey v. Employment Security Commission
green
1 sentence1971What constitutes statutory misconduct was clearly stated in Wickey v. Employment Security Commission (1963), 369 Mich 487 , 498: “ ‘ “Misconduct within the meaning of an unemployment compensation act excluding from its benefits an employee discharged for misconduct must be an act of wanton or wilful disregard of the employer’s interest, a deliberate violation of the employer’s rules, a disregard of standards of be-, havior which the employer has the right to expect of his employee, or negligence in such degree or recurrence as to manifest culpability, wrongful intent, or evil design, or show a | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Linski v. Employment Security Commission
green
2 sentences1962In Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, supra , and in Linski v. Employment Security Commission, 358 Mich 239 , claimed labor disputes were involved. 1962In Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, supra, and in Linski v. Employment Security Commission, 358 Mich 239 , claimed labor disputes were involved. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Mandes v. Employment SEC. Agency
green
2 sentences1959See Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, 343 Mich 380, 405 ; Boynton Cab Company v. Neubeck, 237 Wis 249 ( 296 NW 636 ); Boynton Cab Company v. Schroeder, 237 Wis 264 ( 296 NW 642 ); Mandes v. Employment Security Agency, 74 Idaho 23 ( 255 P2d 1049 ); annotation 146 ALR 243 . 1959See Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, 343 Mich 380, 405 ; Boynton Cab Company v. Neubeck, 237 Wis 249 ( 296 NW 636 ); Boynton Cab Company v. Schroeder, 237 Wis 264 ( 296 NW 642 ); Mandes v. Employment Security Agency, 74 Idaho 23 ( 255 P2d 1049 ); annotation 146 ALR 243 . | 1 | 1959–1959 |
Boynton Cab Co. v. Schroeder
neutral
2 sentences1959See Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, 343 Mich 380, 405 ; Boynton Cab Company v. Neubeck, 237 Wis 249 ( 296 NW 636 ); Boynton Cab Company v. Schroeder, 237 Wis 264 ( 296 NW 642 ); Mandes v. Employment Security Agency, 74 Idaho 23 ( 255 P2d 1049 ); annotation 146 ALR 243 . 1959See Cassar v. Employment Security Commission, 343 Mich 380, 405 ; Boynton Cab Company v. Neubeck, 237 Wis 249 ( 296 NW 636 ); Boynton Cab Company v. Schroeder, 237 Wis 264 ( 296 NW 642 ); Mandes v. Employment Security Agency, 74 Idaho 23 ( 255 P2d 1049 ); annotation 146 ALR 243 . | 1 | 1959–1959 |
State ex rel. Boynton v. Public Service Commission
green
1 sentence1946Boynton, v. Public Service Commission, 135 Kan. 491 (11 Pac. [2d] 999), the supreme court of Kansas said: “It seems clear that when a rate has been the subject of a deliberate inquiry in which the carriers, the shippers and the commission’s own experts have participated, as well as any and all other persons who cared to take a hand in it as the statute provides and permits (R. | 1 | 1946–1946 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.