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.

PAUL UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE. (12/14/60)

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


December 14, 1960

PAUL UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.

Appeal, No. 236, April T., 1960, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-58007, in re claim of Philip Paul. Decision affirmed.

COUNSEL

Philip Paul, appellant, in propria persona.

Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with him Anne X. Alpern, Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.

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

Author: Wright

[ 194 Pa. Super. Page 65]

OPINION BY WRIGHT, J.

Philip Paul had a valid separation from his employment with the Westinghouse Electric Corporation, East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. His last day of work was April 1, 1959. He filed an application for benefits, and received payments for his first benefit year. On April 7, 1960, Paul filed an application for a second benefit year. The Bureau of Employment Security denied benefits because of insufficient base year earnings under the provisions of Section 404 of the Unemployment Compensation Law. Act of December 5, 1936, P.L. [1937] 2897, 43 P.S. 751 et seq. By decision dated and mailed June 8, 1960, the Referee affirmed the Bureau's determination. On June 21, 1960, Paul attempted to appeal from the Referee's decision. The Board of Review, without passing on the merits, dismissed

[ 194 Pa. Super. Page 66]

    the appeal as not being timely filed. Paul has now appealed to this court.

Section 502 of the Unemployment Compensation Law (43 P.S. 822) provides that the Referee's decision shall be deemed final unless appealed from within ten days. Presumably appellant received the decision of the Referee. He makes no assertion to the contrary, and has offered no excuse whatever for his delay. Under the circumstances we have no alternative other than to affirm the decision of the Board. Cf. Renckley Unemployment Compensation Case, 183 Pa. Superior Ct. 363, 132 A.2d 365; Bee Unemployment Compensation Case, 180 Pa. Superior Ct. 231, 119 A.2d 558; Demcio Unemployment Compensation Case, 177 Pa. Superior Ct. 298, 110 A.2d 890.

Disposition

Decision affirmed.

19601214

© 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.