Rogers v. Radio Shack

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an investigator’s report could not, consistent with due process requirements, be used against a party to unemployment compensation proceedings where the party had no opportunity to examine the report, cross-examine the investigator or rebut the contents of the report
• “with no opportunity for cross-examination or rebuttal, fundamental fairness would preclude reliance upon the [subsequently received] report by an administrative agency”
• “We agree with Rogers that under the circumstances here, with no opportunity for cross-examination or rebuttal, fundamental fairness would preclude reliance upon the report by an administrative agency”
• “Rogers appealed the administrative decision to the Circuit Court”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).