Opinion ID: 2227619
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: termination of employment for misconduct

Text: As its second assignment of error, the Department argues that the district court erred in concluding that Tucker's employment with AEG was properly terminated for misconduct. We agree with the Department that such conclusion by the district court was error. We have determined that on this record, M & O, rather than AEG, was Tucker's employer. Therefore, Tucker was not terminated from employment by AEG, much less terminated from employment by AEG for misconduct. The district court's conclusion that Tucker was properly terminated from employment by AEG for misconduct and therefore disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits is not supported by competent evidence and must be reversed. Accordingly, we reverse, and remand to the district court with directions to determine if Tucker is entitled to unemployment compensation benefits with or without disqualification as to his former employer, M & O. See § 48-628(2).