Andala Company v. Ganus

3 Citing cases

  1. Andala Co. v. Ganus

    269 Ala. 571 (Ala. 1959)   Cited 17 times
    Stating that, in determining whether an employee acted reasonably in terminating her employment, "a test of good cause is whether it is reasonable when measured by what the average or normal worker would have done under similar circumstances"

    September 17, 1959. Appeal from the Court of Appeals, 115 So.2d 119. W. H. Albritton, Albritton Rankin, Andalusia, for petitioner.

  2. Arnold v. Hyundai Motor Mfg. Ala., LLC

    292 So. 3d 1042 (Ala. 2019)   Cited 3 times
    In Arnold v. Hyundai Motor Manufacturing Alabama, LLC, 292 So. 3d 1042, 1052 (Ala. 2019), this Court explained that the de novo standard of review applies to a trial court's grant or denial of a request for attorney fees and other amounts that a prevailing party is entitled to recover under a contract.

    In Andala , the claimant admitted that she had voluntarily terminated her employment because she was earning less under a new pay structure. See Andala Co. v. Ganus , 40 Ala. App. 455, 457, 115 So. 2d 119, 120 (1958). And in Jones , the Court of Civil Appeals noted that it was "undisputed" that the claimants had voluntarily terminated their employment by agreeing to buyouts in the face of an imminent workforce restructuring.

  3. Tombigbee Lightweight Aggreg. v. Roberts

    351 So. 2d 1388 (Ala. Civ. App. 1977)   Cited 8 times
    In Tombigbee, the employer challenged this award of benefits because the reduction of hours was based on a general economic depression.

    The law in Alabama is settled in that a substantial reduction in earnings is regarded as good cause for leaving one's employment. See Andala Company v. Ganus, 40 Ala. App. 455, 115 So.2d 119 (1958), rev'd on other grounds 269 Ala. 571, 115 So.2d 123 (1959); Alabama Textile Products, Corp. v. Rodgers, 38 Ala. App. 206, 82 So.2d 267 (1955); 81 C.J.S. Social Security ยง 232 (1977). In this case, claimant's earnings were reduced from at least $165 per week down to a maximum of $130 per week. Such a reduction in wages could constitute a substantial reduction.