Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Employment — unemployment compensation — misconduct

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 3, 2012//

Employment — unemployment compensation — misconduct

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 3, 2012//

Listen to this article

Wisconsin Court of Appeals

Civil

Employment — unemployment compensation — misconduct

Lalita A. Sallis appeals, pro se, the circuit court’s order affirming an order entered by the Labor and Industry Review Commission that denied Sallis’s application for unemployment compensation because it determined that Stein Optical fired Sallis, an optometrist assistant, for misconduct. Sallis argues that the Commission erred because: (1) she contends that there was no evidence, other than hearsay, to support a finding of misconduct; and (2) it did not credit her undisputed testimony that she had created false appointments previously for a Stein Optical doctor who needed to leave early. We affirm. Publication in the official reports is not recommended.

2011AP2531 Sallis v. Labor and Industry Review Commission, et al.

Dist I, Milwaukee County, Brash, J., Fine, J.

Attorneys: For Appellant: Sallis, Lalita A., pro se; For Respondent: Shampo, Jeffrey J., Madison; Shillingstad, Hal A., Minneapolis

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests