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.

ROBERT L. NEVEL v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (09/20/77)

decided: September 20, 1977.

ROBERT L. NEVEL, SR., PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in case of In Re: Claim of Robert L. Nevel, Sr., No. B-133636.

COUNSEL

Christopher Lepore, with him Daniel W. Cooper, and Gatz, Cohen, Segal & Koerner, for petitioner.

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

Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Judge Kramer did not participate in the decision. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr. Judge Kramer did not participate in the decision in this case. See Pa. R.a.p. 3102(d).

Author: Crumlish

[ 32 Pa. Commw. Page 7]

This is an appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) denying unemployment compensation benefits to Claimant, Robert L. Nevel, Sr.

Claimant was relieved from employment as a stock clerk for the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (Employer) for purchasing liquor in New York and transporting it into Pennsylvania in violation of Section 491(2) of the Pennsylvania Liquor Code (Code), Act of April 12, 1951, P.L. 90, as amended, 47 P.S. § 4-491(2), which states in relevant part:

[ 32 Pa. Commw. Page 8]

It shall be unlawful

(2) For any person . . . to . . . transport any liquor . . . within this Commonwealth which was not lawfully acquired prior to January first, one thousand nine hundred and thirty-four, or has not been purchased from a Pennsylvania Liquor Store or in accordance with the Board's regulations.

Claimant's application for unemployment compensation benefits was denied by the Bureau of Employment Security (Bureau) on the basis of Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 802(e), which states in relevant part:

An employee shall be ineligible for compensation for any week --

(e) In which his unemployment is due to his discharge or temporary suspension from work for willful misconduct connected with ...


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.