Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc., 272 N.W.2d 262.

102 citing documents.

Distinguished Santa Williamson, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
A19-0384 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc. , (evaluating whether employee’s quitting was with good cause as a question of law, which must have reasonable support in the findings, and the findings must have the requisite evidentiary support).
Patti L. Davies, Relator v. Donaldson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Patti L. Davies, Relator v. Donaldson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc., the Minnesota Supreme Court reversed an ineligibility determination where the employee’s required work hours doubled over a two-year period and “the employer made unreasonable demands of [the] employee that no one person could be expected to meet.”
Angela Watson, Relator v. St. Stephen's Human Services, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Angela Watson, Relator v. St. Stephen's Human Services, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In Zepp v. Arthur 6 Treacher Fish and Chips, the supreme court found good reason to quit caused by the employer where the employee’s work hours more than doubled and “the employer made unreasonable demands of [the] employee that no one person could be expected to meet.”
Sondra Keeney, Relator v. Midwest Special Services, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Sondra Keeney, Relator v. Midwest Special Services, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Generally, the exception applies only in extreme situations, such as if “the employer made unreasonable demands of [an] employee that no one person could be expected to meet.” Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Nichols v. Reliant Engineering & Manufacturing, Inc. 720 N.W.2d 590 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Nichols v. Reliant Engineering & Manufacturing, Inc. 720 N.W.2d 590 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
See Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc., (interpreting predecessor statute and requiring “good cause” attributable to employer).
Hein v. PRECISION ASSOCIATES, INC. 609 N.W.2d 916 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Hein v. PRECISION ASSOCIATES, INC. 609 N.W.2d 916 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Williams v. RIGHT STEP ACADEMY (CORP) 607 N.W.2d 482 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Williams v. RIGHT STEP ACADEMY (CORP) 607 N.W.2d 482 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
see also Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc., (interpreting predecessor statute, requiring “good cause” attributable to employer).
Dachel v. Ortho Met, Inc. 528 N.W.2d 268 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Dachel v. Ortho Met, Inc. 528 N.W.2d 268 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
The issue of good cause to quit is a question of law that “is not binding on this court if it does not have reasonable support in the findings.” Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Goodwin v. BPS Guard Services, Inc. 524 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Goodwin v. BPS Guard Services, Inc. 524 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Hanke v. Safari Hair Adventure 512 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Hanke v. Safari Hair Adventure 512 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
But whether an employee had “good cause” to quit is a question of law that “is not binding on this court if it does not have reasonable support in the findings.” Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Shanahan v. District Memorial Hospital 495 N.W.2d 894 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Shanahan v. District Memorial Hospital 495 N.W.2d 894 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Miller v. International Express Corp. 495 N.W.2d 616 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Miller v. International Express Corp. 495 N.W.2d 616 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Ultimately, however, whether an employee had good cause to quit is a question of law “which is not binding on this court if it does not have reasonable support in the findings.” Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Mitchell v. Crookston Welding MacHine Co. 492 N.W.2d 256 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Mitchell v. Crookston Welding MacHine Co. 492 N.W.2d 256 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Parnell v. River Bend Carriers, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Parnell v. River Bend Carriers, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Polley v. Gopher Bearing Co. 478 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Polley v. Gopher Bearing Co. 478 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Heaser v. Lerch, Bates & Associates Inc. 467 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Heaser v. Lerch, Bates & Associates Inc. 467 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Prescott v. Moorhead State University 457 N.W.2d 270 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Prescott v. Moorhead State University 457 N.W.2d 270 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Hawthorne v. Universal Studios, Inc. 432 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Hawthorne v. Universal Studios, Inc. 432 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc., ().
Minchew v. Minnesota Odd Fellows Home 429 N.W.2d 702 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Minchew v. Minnesota Odd Fellows Home 429 N.W.2d 702 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Wetterhahn v. Kimm Co. 430 N.W.2d 4 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Wetterhahn v. Kimm Co. 430 N.W.2d 4 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
1(a) (Supp.1987); Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Biegner v. Bloomington Chrysler/Plymouth, Inc. 426 N.W.2d 483 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Biegner v. Bloomington Chrysler/Plymouth, Inc. 426 N.W.2d 483 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips Inc.
McGowan v. Executive Express Transportation Enterprises, Inc. 420 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1988
McGowan v. Executive Express Transportation Enterprises, Inc. 420 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1988
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Samoszuk v. Council of Community Hospitals 412 N.W.2d 814 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Samoszuk v. Council of Community Hospitals 412 N.W.2d 814 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
McGowan v. Executive Express Transportation Enterprises, Inc. 411 N.W.2d 593 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
McGowan v. Executive Express Transportation Enterprises, Inc. 411 N.W.2d 593 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.
Ryks v. Nieuwsma Livestock Equipment 410 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Ryks v. Nieuwsma Livestock Equipment 410 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Zepp v. Arthur Treacher Fish & Chips, Inc.