Parham, Smith & Dodson v. SCDEW

THIS
OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS
PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA

In The Court of Appeals

Parham, Smith
& Dodson, LLC, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina
Department of Employment and Workforce, Respondent.

Appeal from the Administrative Law Court

Shirley C. Robinson, Administrative Law
Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-283

Submitted April 2, 2012 - Filed May 9,
2012

AFFIRMED

Robert W. Jones, of Greenville, for
Appellant.

E. B. McLeod, III, of Columbia, for
Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Parham, Smith
& Dodson, LLC appeals the administrative law court's (ALC) order affirming
the order of the Appellate Panel (Appellate Panel) of the South Carolina
Department of Employment and Workforce (the Department) granting Judy Johnson
full unemployment benefits. On appeal, Employer argues the Appellate Panel
erred in finding Employee was not discharged with cause. Because substantial evidence exists in the record to
support the ALC's decision, we affirm[1] pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-610(B)(d)-(e) (Supp. 2011)
(providing this court may affirm the Appellate Panel's decision if substantial evidence supports it and the decision is
not affected by an error of law); McEachern v. S.C. Emp't Sec. Comm'n,
370 S.C. 553, 557, 635 S.E.2d 644, 647 (Ct. App. 2006) ("Substantial
evidence is evidence which, considering the record as a whole, would allow
reasonable minds to reach the conclusion that the administrative agency
reached. It is more than a mere scintilla of evidence, but is something less
than the weight of the evidence." (footnotes omitted)); S.C. Code Ann. §
41-35-120(2) (Supp. 2011) (providing an unemployed insured worker is ineligible
for benefits when the worker is discharged for cause connected with the
employment); Lee v. S.C. Emp't Sec. Comm'n, 277 S.C. 586, 588, 291
S.E.2d 378, 379 (1982) (holding discharge for cause includes the following
circumstances "(1) the wanton and wilful disregard of the employer's
interests; (2) the deliberate violation of rules; (3) the disregard of the
standard of behavior which an employer can rightfully expect from an employee;
or (4) intentional and substantial negligent disregard for the employee's
interests, duties or obligations").

AFFIRMED.

WILLIAMS,
THOMAS, and LOCKEMY, JJ., concur.

[1] We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to
Rule 215, SCACR.