From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Poepke v. Downtown Standard

Minnesota Court of Appeals
Oct 30, 1984
356 N.W.2d 812 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

No. C6-84-979.

October 30, 1984.

Michael J. Persellin, St. Cloud, for relator.

Dennis E. Dalen, Minneapolis, for Downtown Standard.

Hubert H. Humphrey, III, State Atty. Gen., Regina M. Chu, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Paul, for Com'r of Economic Sec.

Heard, considered and decided by SEDGWICK, P.J., and HUSPENI and NIERENGARTEN, JJ.


SUMMARY OPINION


FACTS

Michael Poepke was discharged when he refused to work one of his two regularly scheduled Saturdays of the month. The Commissioner affirmed the referee's decision that Poepke was disqualified from benefits because he terminated his employment voluntarily and without good cause attributable to his employer or, alternatively, that he was discharged for misconduct.

The Commissioner found that failure to come to work on Saturday knowing that a discharge would result convincingly shows that claimant lacked any concern for his job and was misconduct as defined in Tilseth v. Midwest Lumber Co., 295 Minn. 372, 204 N.W.2d 644 (1973).

DECISION

Under the narrow scope of review available to this court, White v. Metropolitan Medical Center, 332 N.W.2d 25, 26 (Minn. 1983), the Commissioner's decision is supported by the evidence.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Poepke v. Downtown Standard

Minnesota Court of Appeals
Oct 30, 1984
356 N.W.2d 812 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Poepke v. Downtown Standard

Case Details

Full title:Michael W. POEPKE, Relator, v. DOWNTOWN STANDARD, Respondent, Commissioner…

Court:Minnesota Court of Appeals

Date published: Oct 30, 1984

Citations

356 N.W.2d 812 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

Nelson v. Star Tribune

In general, an employee's refusal to work a scheduled shift or comply with a direct order to work has been…

Johnson v. Inver Grove Good Samaritan

However, the employer established that Johnson declined to return to work as scheduled on November 21 and 22,…