Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

GARDECKI UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE. (06/11/57)

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


June 11, 1957

GARDECKI UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.

Appeal, No. 14, March T., 1957, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, August 24, 1956, Decision No. B-42451, in re claim of Stanley Gardecki. Decision affirmed.

COUNSEL

Stanley Gardecki, appellant, in propria persona.

Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with him Thomas D. McBride, Attorney General, for appellee.

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

Author: Watkins

[ 183 Pa. Super. Page 479]

OPINION BY WATKINS, J.

In this unemployment compensation case the claimant, Stanley Gardecki, was employed as an advertising solicitor on a commission basis with a $50. a week drawing account. He admits that he voluntarily terminated his employment because he was dissatisfied with his earnings. The board of review affirmed a decision of the referee and the bureau that disqualified the claimant for benefits under section 402 (b) of the act. In this appeal he complained of the finding of the board that his average earnings fluctuated from $61.07 per week in 1953 to $64.09 per week in 1956 and contends there was a small decrease in his yearly earnings. He does not deny that the $50. a week drawing account remained constant and that any reduction was due to fluctuation in commissions.

[ 183 Pa. Super. Page 480]

The board found that the claimant voluntarily terminated his employment because he was dissatisfied with his earnings although his wages were not decreased by his employer. There is evidence to support this finding. It is clear, therefore, that the claimant failed to establish that the termination of his employment was due to necessitous or compelling reasons within the meaning of Section 402 (b) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (43 PS ยง 802 (b)). Buletza Unemployment Compensation Case, 174 Pa. Superior Ct. 248, 101 A.2d 447 (1953); Goldstein Unemployment Compensation Case, 181 Pa. Superior Ct. 255, 124 A.2d 401 (1956); Drolles Unemployment Compensation Case, 181 Pa. Superior Ct. 575, 124 A.2d 159 (1956).

Disposition

The decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review is affirmed.

19570611

© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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