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.

STRANG UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE. (06/13/62)

June 13, 1962

STRANG UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.


Appeal, No. 39, April T., 1962, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-66725, in re claim of Francis M. Strang. Decision Affirmed.

COUNSEL

Francis M. Strang, appellant, in propria persona, submitted a brief.

Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with him David Stahl, Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.

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

Author: Flood

[ 198 Pa. Super. Page 148]

OPINION BY FLOOD, J.

The claimant has appealed from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review denying him unemployment compensation benefits on the ground that he is not able to work or available for suitable work as required by section 401(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 PS 801(d).

[ 198 Pa. Super. Page 149]

On April 28, 1961, the claimant, then age seventy-five and employed as a janitor, watchman and laborer by the Viko Furniture Company, was involuntarily retired. In the identification, retirement and claimant questionnaires which he filed with the Bureau of Employment Security he stated that, if not recalled to his regular occupation, he would not accept other suitable work. He also stated that he could not accept full-time work immediately and was not then able, willing or available for full-time work because he had retired. Finally, he stated that he was not then able to do any type of work. At his interview the claimant said: "I would not want to work full time as I have worked long and steady. I could do some light work part time close to home. I would have continued working at Viko if allowed to as it did not involve much work or walking."

From a decision of the bureau disapproving his application the claimant appealed on the ground that he "could do some light work". When asked at a hearing before a referee whether he was able or available for work, the claimant testified: "I will if I can find something I'm able to do ... Yes, anything I'm able to do. I can't do any heavy work. Any light work that isn't too far away from home, I'll take it. But I don't like to drive too far ..." When questioned by the referee about the statements he had made in the various questionnaires, the claimant testified: "... I told them like this, that I was willing to accept part time work, because I though I needed a rest. I had worked down there six straight years to a day and in six years I lost 30 working days, and I had one week's vacation; and I thought I needed part time work to get a little bit of rest. I was worn out ..."

From a decision of the referee affirming the order of the bureau the claimant appealed to the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review on the grounds

[ 198 Pa. Super. Page 150]

    that he erroneously had thought he was automatically eligible for benefits at the time he made application and that, in fact, he was able and willing to work. However, at a remand hearing ordered by the board the claimant testified only that "... the lady asked me it I would accept any suitable work. That is what I could do in connection with what I had been doing. I told her I would ... I ... told them I would accept any work that I was able to do. I wasn't capable of going out and digging ditches any longer. Anything I was capable of doing I would do. I have also been looking for work. I don't like to be idle ... If I can find any work that I am able to do I ...


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.