Syllabus The defendant administrator of the Unemployment Compensation Act appealed to this court from the judgment of the trial court sustaining the appeal by the plaintiff from the determination of the employment security board of review denying the plaintiff unemployment compensation benefits. Held that, for the reasons set forth by this court in the related case of Tosado v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act ( 130 Conn. App. 266), the trial court improperly determined that the board's factual findings did not support the board's conclusion that the plaintiff was discharged for wilful misconduct.
Opinion
ROBINSON, J.
The named defendant, the administrator of the Unemployment Compensation Act, appeals from the judgment of the Superior Court sustaining the appeal by the plaintiff, Eddie C. Tosado, from the determination of the employment security board of review (board) denying the plaintiff unemployment compensation benefits. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly determined that the board's factual findings did not support the board's conclusion that the plaintiff was discharged for wilful misconduct. We agree and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the trial court.
We note that the defendant, The Wellpoint Companies, Inc., filed a separate appeal from the judgment of the trial court. See Tosado v. Administartor, Unemployment Compensation Act, 130 Conn. App. 266, A.3d (2011). We refer to the administrator of the Unemployment Compensation Act as the defendant in this opinion.
In the related case of Tosado v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, 130 Conn. App. 266 A.3d (2011), we addressed the claim of error raised by the present appeal. We adopt the reasoning and conclusion of that opinion to resolve the present appeal.
The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded with direction to render judgment for the defendant.
In this opinion the other judges concurred.