Castro v. Kaminski

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the Board properly affirmed the referee’s exclusion of evidence not submitted in advance of the hearing, where the Department objected to such evidence
• upon a party’s objection, referee is obligated to exclude documents that are not produced in compliance with the telephone hearing regulations
• “Based on Dr. Kracht’s testimony alone, the Board’s finding that [the employer] did not operate primarily for religious purposes is supported by substantial evidence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).