Court Cases Court Cases
AL  AK  AZ  AR  CA  CO  CT  DE  FL  GA  HI  ID  IL  IN  IA  KS  KY  LA  ME  MD  MA  MI  MN  MS  MO  MT  NE  NV 
NH  NJ  NM  NY  NC  ND  OH  OK  OR  PA  RI  SC  SD  TN  TX  UT  VT  VA  WA  WV  WI  WY  EO  NR  PR  DC  US 
 
View Case Details
 
MATTHEWS INC. APPELLANT
vs.
DIRECTOR EMPLOYMENT SECURITY DEPARTMENT APPELLEE
 
Case:
No. E92-171
 
Location:
COURT OF APPEALS OF ARKANSAS DIVISION ONE
 
Date:
August 25 1993 Delivered
 
Attorneys:
For Appellant: Gill Johnson & Gill by: Brooks A. Gill Dumas. For Appellee: Ronald A. Calkins Little Rock.
 
Court:
ROGERS Jennings Cooper
 
Author:
The Hon. Justice Judith Rogers
 

Matthews Inc. appeals from the decision of the Arkansas Board of Review which awarded the claimant Roosevelt Marks unemployment compensation based on a finding that he had been discharged for reasons other than misconduct connected with the work. Because the only question involved is the sufficiency of the evidence and because the Board's decision adequately explains its decision and we affirm we issue a memorandum opinion pursuant to our per curiam In re Memorandum Opinions 16 Ark. App. 301 700 S.W.2d 63 (1985).

The record reflects that the claimant was employed as a truck driver until he was discharged just six months after he was hired. Appellant resisted the payment of unemployment compensation contending that the claimant had been discharged for misconduct connected with the work when it was discovered that he had failed the drug test which had been given at the time he had been hired. Claimant denied that he had used cocaine and gave testimony suggesting that his urine sample had been placed on a table with many other such samples.

In making its decision the Board found that the test results were not reliable. Furthermore the Board resolved the issue of credibility in the claimant's favor.

In reviewing decisions of the Board of Review we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the findings of the Board and we will affirm the Board's decision if its findings are supported by substantial evidence. American Transportation v. Director 39 Ark. App. 104 840 S.W.2d 198 (1992). The credibility of witnesses and the drawing of inferences from the testimony is for the Board of Review not this court. Baker v. Director 39 Ark. App. 5 832 S.W.2d 864 (1992).

From our review of the record we cannot conclude that the Board's findings are not supported by substantial evidence and we affirm.

Affirmed.

Jennings C.J. and Cooper J. agree.