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.

FRANK CALVANO v. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD REVIEW COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA. FRANK CALVANO (02/16/77)

decided: February 16, 1977.

FRANK CALVANO
v.
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA. FRANK CALVANO, APPELLANT



Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Frank Calvano, No. B-128698.

COUNSEL

Donetta W. Ambrose, with her Ambrose & Ambrose, for appellant.

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

Judges Crumlish, Jr., Mencer and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt.

Author: Blatt

[ 29 Pa. Commw. Page 80]

Frank Calvano (claimant) appeals here from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of

[ 29 Pa. Commw. Page 81]

Review (Board) which affirmed a referee's decision to deny him unemployment compensation benefits because he was not available for work as required by Section 401(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Law,*fn1 43 P.S. ยง 801(d). He had applied for benefits in July 1975 after having been last employed in Germany by the United States Department of Defense as a school guidance counselor. His work was finished with the end of the school term on June 13, 1975, and he had then been placed on leave without pay for the summer.

In an unemployment compensation case, review by this Court is limited to questions of law and a determination of whether or not the findings of the Board are supported by substantial evidence, giving to the party prevailing below the benefit of all reasonable and logical inferences. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Kessler, 27 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 1, 365 A.2d 459 (1976). The claimant argues here that (1) the referee's findings of fact relied upon by the Board are not supported by substantial evidence and (2) the Board erred as a matter of law in concluding that he was unavailable for employment.

We have previously held that the question of a claimant's availability for work in an unemployment compensation case is one of fact for the Board. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. Smith, 25 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 471, 360 A.2d 833 (1976), and the Board here relied upon the following findings of fact made by the referee:

3. The claimant intends to return to be a guidance counselor for the Department of Defense at the beginning of the new school year.

[ 29 Pa. Commw. Page 824]

. The claimant will be available for work only during the summer months ...


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.