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.

UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD REVIEW COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA v. E. FRANKLIN BOHL (03/04/76)

decided: March 4, 1976.

UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
v.
E. FRANKLIN BOHL, APPELLANT



Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of E. Franklin Bohl, No. B-125185.

COUNSEL

Boyd G. Hixson, with him Harry A. Dower, for appellant.

Daniel R. Schuckers, Assistant Attorney General, with him Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, and Robert P. Kane, Attorney General, for appellee.

Judges Kramer, Wilkinson, Jr., and Mencer, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Mencer.

Author: Mencer

[ 23 Pa. Commw. Page 544]

E. Franklin Bohl (appellant) was last employed by Allentown Converting Co. Since 1959, appellant held the office of president of the company; he was also a director of the company and owned approximately 25 percent (27,001 shares) of the stock in the company. His day-to-day duties consisted of managing production of the corporation's textile processing. The majority stockholder of the corporation was Leland Smith, who at various times owned up to 65 percent of the stock.

Early in 1974, the board of directors decided to liquidate the corporation. This was accomplished, and appellant's last day of work was September 30, 1974. Appellant applied for and was denied unemployment benefits by the Bureau of Employment Security on the grounds that he had become an unemployed "businessman" rather than an unemployed "worker." On appeal, the referee and the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) upheld the Bureau's determination.

Our scope of review in an appeal from the Board is defined in Section 510 of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law):*fn1

"[T]he findings of the board or referee, as the case may be, as to the facts, if supported by the evidence and in the absence of fraud, shall be conclusive, and in such cases the jurisdiction of the court shall be confined to questions of law. . . ."

Appellant alleges that the Board erred as a matter of law in concluding that he was ineligible, as an unemployed

[ 23 Pa. Commw. Page 545]

    businessman, to receive benefits under Section 402(h) of the Law.*fn2 Section 402(h) ...


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.