Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

HAMILTON UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE. (07/17/56)

July 17, 1956

HAMILTON UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.


Appeal, No. 35, April T., 1956, by claimant, from decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, dated October 28, 1955, No. B-40295, in re claim of Arthur E. Hamilton. Decision vacated.

COUNSEL

R. N. McGee, Jr., with him Arthur E. Hamilton, appellant, in propria persona.

Sydney Reuben, Special Deputy Attorney General, with him Herbert B. Cohen, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before Rhodes, P.j., Hirt, Gunther, Wright, Woodside, Ervin, and Carr, JJ.

Author: Rhodes

[ 181 Pa. Super. Page 115]

OPINION BY RHODES, P.J.

This is an unemployment compensation case in which the claimant, Arthur E. Hamilton, was denied benefits by the bureau, the referee, and the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature, within the meaning of section 402 (b) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, as amended, 43 PS ยง 802 (b). Claimant has appealed from the board's decision.

Claimant was employed by Gilbert K. Myers, owner of the Myers Aviation Company of Leechburg, Pennsylvania, as a flight instructor for a period of approximately fifteen months. On June 18, 1955, that employment was terminated by the voluntary act of claimant. The only question presented throughout the proceeding was whether he acted by reason of necessitous and compelling circumstances and consequently with good cause.*fn1

Four reasons were advanced by claimant for leaving his employment: (1) That his employer insisted that he operate an aircraft which proved to be unsafe notwithstanding repeated attempts to correct mechanical defects; (2) that the employer lost his certification from the Veterans' Administration as an approved flying school; (3) that the employer no longer carried personal injury and property damage liability insurance

[ 181 Pa. Super. Page 116]

    to cover passengers and property; and (4) that the employer solicited claimant to falsify certain official flight reports in connection with an investigation by the government.*fn2

The employer denied that he asked claimant to fly an unsafe plane. He admitted that the Veterans' Administration had canceled his certification as an approved school, but asserted that there was still sufficient work available for claimant in private instruction. He admitted that he no longer carried insurance, but denied that he asked claimant to falsify any reports.

The referee made three findings of fact, and concluded that claimant's reasons for separation did not constitute a necessitous and compelling cause for his ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.