# Nelson v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services

> District of Columbia Court of Appeals · September 14, 1987 · 530 A.2d 1193

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9634907

## Case

- **Full name:** Lana NELSON, Petitioner, v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, Respondent
- **Court:** District of Columbia Court of Appeals
- **Decided:** September 14, 1987
- **Citations:** 530 A.2d 1193; 1987 D.C. App. LEXIS 433
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Pryor
- **Judges:** Pryor, MacK, Rogers
- **Cited by:** 11 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/9634907

## Opinion text

PRYOR, Chief Judge,
dissenting:
Looking to the merits of petitioner’s argument, it appears that the pertinent language of the statute which controls eligibility for unemployment compensation, D.C. Code § 46-108 (c) (1986 Supp.), is plain and straightforward. It requires a claimant to have “been paid” wages in at least two quarters of her base period. For me, this case does not involve so much a deference *1202 to an agency s construction of its statute, but more an application of clearly drafted language.
I recognize that, from petitioner’s position, the language seems unduly rigid. Perhaps the legislature should take a hard look at the statute to see if a change is warranted.
I would affirm.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9634907. Public record. Not legal advice.