# Peerless Pacific Co. v. Employment Division

> Court of Appeals of Oregon · December 27, 1976 · 27 Or. App. 909

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6923139

## Case

- **Full name:** PEERLESS PACIFIC COMPANY v. EMPLOYMENT DIVISION
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Oregon
- **Decided:** December 27, 1976
- **Citations:** 27 Or. App. 909; 557 P.2d 680; 1976 Ore. App. LEXIS 1583
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Schwab
- **Judges:** Schwab, Tanzer, Thornton
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6923139

## Opinion text

SCHWAB, C. J.
This is a proceeding for judicial review of an order of the Employment Appeals Board finding claimant had good cause to leave employment and granting claimant unemployment compensation benefits.
The Board found that claimant left her employment because petitioner discriminated against her. Though the Board’s opinion is inartfully worded, an examination of the entire findings made by the Board reveals that the Board clearly meant claimant had been discriminated against because she was a woman. As we have previously said, we cannot disturb a reasonable conclusion drawn from the facts by the Board even though, were we sitting as triers of fact, we might well reach a different conclusion. Grigsby v. Employment Div., 24 Or App 499 , 546 P2d 788 (1976); Cantrell v. Employment Division, 24 Or App 215 , 545 P2d 143 , Sup Ct review denied (1976). We have reviewed the record and conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s findings, and that claimant had actually been discriminated against, and that such discrimination was due to her sex. See Fajardo v. Morgan, 15 Or App 454 , 516 P2d 495 (1973).
Affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6923139. Public record. Not legal advice.