# Jackson v. Daniels

> Court of Appeals of Arkansas · June 4, 1980 · 269 Ark. 714

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7821281

## Case

- **Full name:** Hettie A. JACKSON v. Charles L. DANIELS, Director of Labor, and.LADONNA SPORTSWEAR
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Arkansas
- **Decided:** June 4, 1980
- **Citations:** 269 Ark. 714; 600 S.W.2d 427; 1980 Ark. App. LEXIS 1274
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Penix
- **Judges:** Newbern, Penix
- **Cited by:** 6 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/7821281

## Opinion text

Marian F. Penix, Judge, dissenting. I disagree with the majority. They find there was not substantial evidence to support the Board of Review determination the appellant was disqualified in accordance with Ark. Stat. Ann. § 81-1106(a).
The appellant may well have had legitimate cause for dissatisfaction with her job conditions. However, by her own admissions, she made no effort to discuss her dissatisfaction with higher supervisory or management personnel nor did she attempt to invoke the available grievance procedures established by the union for the processing of such employee compaints with higher management.
Before invoking the relief provided by the State of Arkansas, the appellant should have exhausted the initial remedies available to her. Unemployment benefits are designed to keep workers afloat when other financial avenues are closed to them. However, these avenues must have been travelled before unemployment benefits are available.
I respectfully dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7821281. Public record. Not legal advice.