Gaines v. Employment Dept.

“In determining whether the board’s order is supported by substantial reason, [the court] consider[s] whether that order articulate the reasoning that leads from the facts found to the conclusions drawn.” Walker v. Providence Health System Oregon, 254 Or App 676, 686, 298 P3d 38, rev den, 353 Or 714 (2013).

Claimant appealed an Employment Appeals Board (EAB) decision that denied her request for unemployment benefits. Claimant assigned error to the EAB’s conclusion that she voluntarily quit her employment without good cause. She argued the EAB’s decision was not supported by substantial reason. “In determining whether the board’s order is supported by substantial reason, [the court] consider[s] whether that order articulate the reasoning that leads from the facts found to the conclusions drawn.” Walker v. Providence Health System Oregon, 254 Or App 676, 686, 298 P3d 38, rev den, 353 Or 714 (2013). The Court of Appeals held that the EAB’s decision to deny the request was not based on substantial reason because of inconsistencies in the order concerning the actual time the employee-employer relationship was severed. Reversed and remanded.