Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Auger v. Gillette Co., 303 N.W.2d 255.

61 citing documents.

Tyler Leibfried, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
e court has “said that the issue is not whether the employer can choose to terminate the employment relationship, but rather 16 ‘whether, now that [the employee has been] terminated, there should be unemployment compensation, a determination which focuses on the willfulness of the [employee’s] behavior.’” Schmidgall, d at 806 (alteration in original) ().
Walter Nachtigall, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
expect that [relator] answer its questions with full disclosure.” The ULJ further reasoned that honesty is “ very important in the workplace, especially regarding the conductin g of financial transactions.” Dishonesty during an employer’s investigation can be a deliberate violation of “standards of behavior which the employer has a right to expect of his employee.” Auger v. Gillette Co. , ; see also Baron v. Lens Crafters, Inc. , -08 (Minn. App. 1994) (“Dishonesty that is connected with employme
Sanaide Appolon, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
DEED argues that the ULJ’s finding that Appolon was discharged—and did not quit—is supported by substantial evidence.
Ryan Wille, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Jason Brennan, Relator v. Lubrication Technologies, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jason Brennan, Relator v. Lubrication Technologies, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
[in the] standards of behavior which the employer has a right to expect of his employee.”
Kimberly G. Baker, Relator v. Minnesota State Supreme Court, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Kimberly G. Baker, Relator v. Minnesota State Supreme Court, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(stating that a warning was not essential to demonstrate that employees acted in willful disregard of employer’s interest).
Tiffany Montgomery, Relator v. AT & T Mobility Services, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Tiffany Montgomery, Relator v. AT & T Mobility Services, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(stating that warning was not essential to demonstrate employees acted in willful disregard of employer’s interest).
Jayne M. Eiden-Kellam, Relator v. Mayo Clinic Health System – Fairmont, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Patricia Medal, Relator v. Agassiz Federal Credit Union, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Patricia Medal, Relator v. Agassiz Federal Credit Union, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(stating that a warning was not essential to demonstrate that employees acted in willful disregard of employer’s interest).
Jayne M. Eiden-Kellam, Relator v. Mayo Clinic Health System – Fairmont, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Melissa Jungen, Relator v. Sanders, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Melissa Jungen, Relator v. Sanders, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jacqueline Crosser, Relator v. McAlpin Agency, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jacqueline Crosser, Relator v. McAlpin Agency, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(stating that a warning was not essential to demonstrate that employees acted in willful disregard of employer’s interest).
Timothy J. Fish, Relator v. Young Men�s Christian Association - YMCA Brainerd, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Timothy J. Fish, Relator v. Young Men�s Christian Association - YMCA Brainerd, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
David K. Beckwith, Relator v. Duluth Lawn & Sport, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
David K. Beckwith, Relator v. Duluth Lawn & Sport, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In addition, an employer is not required to give a warning before discharging an employee for employment misconduct, and similar conduct by co-workers “is not a valid defense to a claim of misconduct.”
Steven Morris Smith, Relator v. Family Life Mental Health Center, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Steven Morris Smith, Relator v. Family Life Mental Health Center, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Brown v. National American University 686 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Brown v. National American University 686 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Schmidgall v. FilmTec Corp. 644 N.W.2d 801 Minn. 2002
Schmidgall v. FilmTec Corp. 644 N.W.2d 801 Minn. 2002
We have said that the issue is not whether the employer can choose to terminate the employment relationship, but rather “whether, now that [the employee has been] terminated, there should be unemployment compensation, a determination which focuses on the willfulness of the [employee’s] behavior.”
Ballin v. Metropolitan Transit Commission 525 N.W.2d 11 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Ballin v. Metropolitan Transit Commission 525 N.W.2d 11 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
(“Because the nature of an employer’s interest will vary depending upon the job, what constitutes disregard of that interest, and therefore misconduct, will also vary”).
Ress v. Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Inc. 448 N.W.2d 519 Minn. 1989
Ress v. Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Inc. 448 N.W.2d 519 Minn. 1989
Ress v. Abbott Northwestern Hospital, Inc. 438 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Reed v. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Golden Valley, District 5 422 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Reed v. Minnesota Department of Transportation, Golden Valley, District 5 422 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
§ 268.03 (1986); McGowan v. Executive Express Transporation Enterprises, Inc., Smith v. Employers’ Overload Co., -22 (Minn.1981)
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
See, e.g., Sticha v. McDonald’s No. 291
Mark W. Peterson Law Offices v. Murphey 392 N.W.2d 319 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Distinguished Mark W. Peterson Law Offices v. Murphey 392 N.W.2d 319 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Del Dee Foods, Inc. v. Miller 390 N.W.2d 415 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Del Dee Foods, Inc. v. Miller 390 N.W.2d 415 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
-58 (Minn.1981), where a single instance of sleeping on the job was found to constitute misconduct.
St. Williams Nursing Home v. Koep 369 N.W.2d 33 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
St. Williams Nursing Home v. Koep 369 N.W.2d 33 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Whorton v. Department of Health & Human Services 368 N.W.2d 750 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Whorton v. Department of Health & Human Services 368 N.W.2d 750 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Jeane Thorne Temporary Service, Inc. v. Elliott 351 N.W.2d 393 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Jeane Thorne Temporary Service, Inc. v. Elliott 351 N.W.2d 393 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Benson v. Iowa Beef Processors 348 N.W.2d 394 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Benson v. Iowa Beef Processors 348 N.W.2d 394 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Windsperger v. Broadway Liquor Outlet 346 N.W.2d 142 Minn. 1984