657.215
Disqualification for misrepresentation. An individual is disqualified for benefits for a
period not to exceed 52 weeks whenever the Director of the Employment
Department finds that the individual has willfully made a false statement or
misrepresentation, or willfully failed to report a material fact, to obtain any
benefits under this chapter. The length of the period of disqualification and
the time when the period begins shall be determined by the director in the
discretion of the director, according to the circumstances in each case. During
each week of disqualification so imposed, an individual must meet all the
eligibility requirements of this chapter. Any disqualification imposed under
this section may be applied to any week claimed but remaining unpaid on the
date of the disqualifying decision under this section but not to exceed five
years from the date of the decision. The director may cancel the
disqualification wholly or in part as the director deems proper and equitable. [Amended
by 1977 c.295 §5; 2007 c.87 §1]
657.220 [Repealed by 1955 c.655 §25]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
11
cases, 1972–1996 · leading case:
Cook v. Emp. Div., 614 P.2d 1193 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
Cook v. Emp. Div., 614 P.2d 1193 (Or. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 6× “1 Petitioner was also disqualified from receiving benefits for a period of 26 weeks pursuant to ORS 657.215 2 for wilful failure to report a material fact in order to obtain unemployment benefits.”
Emp. Div. v. Bechtel, 585 P.2d 769 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 4× “In this case, as well as in two companion cases, 1 the primary question is whether the 1977 amendment to ORS 657.215 is to be applied retroactively.”
Steele v. Emp. Dep't, 923 P.2d 1252 (Or. Ct. App. 1996).
“ORS 657.215 establishes a 26-week disqualification for persons who engage in but are not convicted of essentially the same willful conduct.”
Norton v. Dep't of Emp., 500 P.2d 825 (Idaho 1972).
“40, §§ 214(f), 216 (f); Or.Rev.Stat. §§ 657.215, 657.310; 43 Fa.Stat.”
Hyde v. Emp. Div., 728 P.2d 19 (Or. 1986).
· cites it 2× “Because the Employment Division concluded that the claimant had “wilfully” failed to report these earnings, the Employment Division disqualified him for unemployment benefits for a period of 26 weeks pursuant to ORS 657.215. 1 The claimant admitted that he had failed to report…”
Cook v. Emp. Div., 666 P.2d 264 (Or. Ct. App. 1983).
“310 to repay benefits overpaid to him in the amount of $2,261 and disqualified pursuant to ORS 657.215 from receiving benefits for a period of 26 weeks for wilful failure to report a material fact in order to obtain unemployment compensation benefits.”
Pruett v. Emp. Div., 740 P.2d 196 (Or. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 3× “’ ” Therefore, under ORS 657.215, he was disqualified for four otherwise compensable weeks.”
Laing v. Emp. Div., 850 P.2d 1136 (Or. Ct. App. 1993).
“1 ORS 657.215. She makes four assignments: (1) The Employment Division (Division) violated her due process rights by not providing her notice of its investigation; (2) EAB failed to consider certain evidence; (3) the Division should have provided her with an alternative earnings…”
Emp. Div. v. Davis, 585 P.2d 769 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 3× “Petitioner Employment Division seeks judicial review of a determination by the Employment Appeals Board that the extent of claimant Davis’ disqualification from unemployment benefits is governed by the provisions of ORS 657.215 prior to its amendment by Oregon Laws 1977, § 5 of…”
Johnson v. Emp. Div., 799 P.2d 682 (Or. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “ORS 657.215. We reverse. EAB adopted these findings by the referee: “(5) The claimant is mentally retarded.”
Hughes v. Emp. Div., 579 P.2d 870 (Or. Ct. App. 1978).
“155 and that claimant wilfully made false statements within the meaning of ORS 657.215 and is therefore liable for repayment under ORS 657.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.