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.

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

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA


June 13, 1962

LEVY UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION CASE.

Appeal, No. 130, April T., 1962, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-69101, in re claim of Angela F. Levy. Decision affirmed.

COUNSEL

Morton B. DeBroff, for appellant.

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

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

Author: Montgomery

[ 198 Pa. Super. Page 448]

OPINION BY MONTGOMERY, J.

Claimant had a valid separation from her former employer, Eljer Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, as of September 30, 1960. She received unemployment compensation benefits until February 26, 1961, when they were discontinued due to her pregnancy. In early May, 1961, she applied for benefits, and on June 29, 1961, she was offered a position with the Bureau of Employment Security which she failed to accept, because she was going out of town and would not be back until the following week.

The Bureau of Employment Security denied benefits, the referee reversed and allowed benefits, and the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, after a remand hearing, reversed the referee and again denied benefits.

Our examination of the record discloses evidence to support the board's finding that claimant was interviewed on June 28, 1961, and given a definite job offer on the following day. The board's acceptance of the evidence establishing these facts is conclusive and binding on this Court. Ristis Unemployment Compensation Case, 178 Pa. Superior Ct. 400, 116 A.2d 271. Therefore, she must have substantial and reasonable grounds for refusing offered work. Cohen Unemployment Compensation

[ 198 Pa. Super. Page 449]

Case, 189 Pa. Superior Ct. 140, 149 A.2d 186.

We are constrained to hold that dental appointments, subject to cancellation or change, do not constitute such grounds.

Disposition

Decision affirmed.

19620613

© 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.