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.

JOHN DOMBROSKIE v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (09/11/79)

decided: September 11, 1979.

JOHN DOMBROSKIE, 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 John Dombroskie, No. B-155906.

COUNSEL

Peter B. Macky, for petitioner.

Gary Niarini, with him Reese F. Couch, Assistant Attorney General, and Edward G. Biester, Jr., Acting Attorney General, for respondent.

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

Author: Macphail

[ 45 Pa. Commw. Page 547]

John Dombroskie (Claimant) appeals the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

[ 45 Pa. Commw. Page 548]

(Board) which denied him benefits pursuant to Section 3 of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Act), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. § 752.*fn1

Claimant was employed by the Department of Environmental Resources, Bureau of Human Relations, as a security officer for five years and three months. On August 16, 1977, Claimant was discharged for being convicted on charges of "hit and run" in an accident occurring while he was off duty driving his own automobile on July 6, 1977, and for falsifying his accident report. These matters were confirmed in a letter from the employer to the Claimant dated August 17, 1977. Both offenses are summary offenses.

An application for benefits was filed with the Bureau of Employment Security (Bureau) on August 21, 1977. The Bureau denied benefits pursuant to

[ 45 Pa. Commw. Page 549]

Section 402(e) of the Act, 43 P.S. § 802(e).*fn2 Claimant appealed, and, after a hearing at which Claimant was the only witness, the referee affirmed claimant's ineligibility but denied benefits under Section 3 of the Act, 43 P.S. § 752, instead of Section 402(e). Claimant appealed to the Board which affirmed the referee. It is from that decision and order that the present appeal arises.

Claimant argues that 1) the Board abused its discretion in that its decision is not supported by substantial evidence; 2) the Board erred as a matter of law by disqualifying Claimant pursuant to Section 3 of the Act; and 3) a denial of benefits pursuant to Section 3 of the Act violates the Due Process Clause of the Pennsylvania and United States ...


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.