Unemployment Insurance Benefits Misconduct Cases In Montana
The employer bears the burden of proving that the discharged employee does not qualify for unemployment insurance benefits because the employer discharged the employee for misconduct. Bean v. Village Health Care Center, 290 Mont. 496, 965 P.2d 256 (1998).
The question of whether an employee has engaged in conduct which falls within the perimeters of the language set forth in the relevant administrative rules are questions of fact. Hafner v. Montana Dept. of Labor and Ind., 280 Mont. 95, 100, 929 P.2d 233 (1996).
Under MCA 39-51-2410 (5), factual findings of the Board of Labor Appeals are conclusive if they are supported by substantial evidence and there has been no fraud. Phoenix Physical Therapy v. Unemployment Insurance Division, Contributions Bureau, 248 Mont. 95, 943 P.2d 523 (1997).
Whether those facts then constitute misconduct involves interpretation and application of the Administrative Rules of Montana and is a legal conclusion reviewable by the Court. Hafner, supra.