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.

RONALD L. SIRMAN v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (05/17/78)

decided: May 17, 1978.

RONALD L. SIRMAN, 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 Ronald L. Sirman, No. B-125599-B.

COUNSEL

Elliot B. Platt, for appellant.

Michael Klein, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

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

Author: Crumlish

[ 35 Pa. Commw. Page 335]

Ronald Sirman (Claimant) appeals a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) denying him benefits predicated upon its determination that Claimant voluntarily terminated his employment without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature. We affirm.

[ 35 Pa. Commw. Page 336]

After a remand hearing by this Court for the purpose of taking additional testimony, the Board found that Claimant was last employed by Weniger Specialty Company, Inc. (Employer) as a "cleaner," sanding and smoothing castings; that Claimant has suffered from an asthmatic condition since he was 12 years of age; and that Claimant voluntarily terminated his employment on August 13, 1974.

Though not disputing the Board's determination that Claimant voluntarily terminated his employment, Claimant objects to those findings which support its conclusion that he did so without a compelling and necessitous cause. The disputed findings are as follows:

4. The employer furnishes masks for the employes to wear.

5. Claimant refused to use the masks because he could not smoke cigarettes.

As our Supreme Court noted in Taylor v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 474 Pa. 351, 355, 378 A.2d 829, 831 (1977):

It is now axiomatic in an unemployment compensation case, that the findings of fact made by the Board, or by the referee as the case may be, are conclusive on appeal so long as the record, taken as a whole, contains substantial evidence to support those findings. . . . The appellate court's duty is to examine the testimony in the light most favorable to the party in whose favor the Board has found, giving that party the benefit of all inferences that can logically and reasonably be drawn from the testimony, to see ...


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.