McClain v. Review Board of the Indiana Department of Workforce Development

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the purposes were met as McClain knew of the violation, knew or could be fairly charged with knowledge that it could result in termination, and there was no arbitrary enforcement, and holding that those factual determinations were supported by substantial evidence
• appellate court does not reweigh evidence or assess credibility of witnesses and considers only evidence most favorable to Review Board’s findings
• “An example of such an ultimate fact would be whether the workplace rule is reasonable”
• testimony by the supervisor and employer’s representative that “it was standard practice to discharge employees who violated the timecard policy” was substantial evidence to show that the policy was uniformly enforced

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).