Skip to main content

Leibbrand v. Employment Security Department

Wash. Ct. App.July 23, 2001No. No. 47149-0-ICited 3 times
Defendant WinBoeing
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Cox
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The court affirmed the Employment Security Department's decision to deny unemployment benefits, rejecting the claimant's constitutional challenge to the statute precluding alcoholism as a defense to disqualifying misconduct.

What This Ruling Means

# Leibbrand v. Employment Security Department ## What Happened A person named Leibbrand had a dispute with Washington's Employment Security Department involving employment-related benefits or claims. The specific details of what triggered the disagreement aren't fully documented in available records. ## What the Court Decided A Washington appeals court heard the case in 2001, but the exact ruling isn't specified in the available information. No damages were awarded in this case. ## Why This Matters for Workers While the complete details are limited, cases involving the Employment Security Department typically affect workers' access to unemployment benefits or other employment protections. Court rulings in these cases establish how the state handles worker claims and whether the department properly follows its rules. Such decisions can influence how benefits are granted or denied to other workers in similar situations. **Note:** To fully understand this case's impact on your specific situation, you would need to review the complete court decision or consult with a legal professional who can explain how it applies to your circumstances.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.