Cited by

7(d) (2022); Rowan v. Dream It, Inc.

“We view the ULJ’s factual findings in the light most favorable to the decision, giving deference to the credibility determinations made by the ULJ” and “will not disturb the ULJ’s factual findings when the evidence substantially sustains them.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., (quotation omitted); see also Wilson v. Mortg.

“We view the ULJ’s factual findings in the light most favorable to the decision, giving deference to the credibility determinations made by the ULJ” and “will not disturb the ULJ’s factual findings when the evidence substantially sustains them.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., (quotation omitted); see also Wilson v. Mortg.

See Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., 8 (noting that whether an employee had a good reason to quit is a question of law subject to de novo review).

Ctr., Rowan v. Dream It, Inc.

“Whether an employee had good cause to quit is a question of law, which we review de novo.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., (quotation omitted).

Good Reason Caused by the Employer “Whether an employee had good cause to quit is a question of law, which we review de novo.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc ., (quotation omitted).

Ctr., Rowan v. Dream It, Inc.

-harassment complaint constituted good reason to quit); Rootes v. Wal-Mart Assocs., Inc., (impending substantial changes in wages and hours constituted good reason to quit); Munro Holding, LLC v. Cook , (concluding that ongoing sexual harassment by the employer -owner constituted good reason to quit); Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., ( employer encouraging employee to resign and form LLC without informing her of the consequences amounted to good reason to quit).

3(e) (2018); see generally Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., n.4 (Minn. App. 2012) (distinguishing a situation involving a notification of future discharge, which is not a good reason to quit, from a situation where the employer reduced an employee’s hours and encouraged her to quit and work as an independent contractor, which was a good reason to quit).

“In order to constitute good cause, the circumstances which compel the decision to leave employment must be real, not imaginary, substantial, not trifling, and r easonable, not whimsical; there must be some compulsion produced by extraneous and nec essitous circumstances.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc. , (quoting Ferguson v. Dep’t of Emp’t Serv.

“Whether an employee had goo d cause to quit is a question of law, which we review de novo.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc. , ( quotation omitted).

Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., -83 (Minn. App. 2012).

Cf. Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., d 879, 883-89 (Minn. App. 2012) (stating that loss of guaranteed number of hours and resulting lower pay and benefits provided a good reason caused by the employer to quit).

“[W]e will no t disturb the ULJ ’s factual findings when the evidence substantially sustains them.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc. , (quotation omitted).

“Whether an employee had good cause to quit is a question of law, which we review de novo.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., (quotation omitted).

“Whether an employee had good cause to quit is a question of law, which we review de novo.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., (quotation omitted).

“Whether an employee had good cause to quit is a question of law, which we review de novo.” Rowan v. Dream It, Inc.

Rovwan v. Dream It, Inc.

Rowan v. 4 Dream It, Inc.

While the applicant’s reason for quitting is a question of fact, Beyer v. Heavy Duty Air, Inc., -82 (Minn. App. 1986), whether that reason constituted good cause to quit is a question of law that we review de novo, Rowan v. Dream It, Inc., d 879, 883 (Minn. App. 2012).