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.

MT. LEBANON SCHOOL DISTRICT v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (01/17/80)

decided: January 17, 1980.

MT. LEBANON SCHOOL DISTRICT, 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 Thomas R. Knaus, No. B-162774.

COUNSEL

Donald C. Bush, with him Michael A. Cassidy, Anderson, Moreland & Bush, for petitioner.

Elsa Newman, Assistant Attorney General, with her John T. Kupchinsky, Assistant Attorney General, Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel and Edward G. Biester, Jr., Attorney General, for respondent.

Shelley W. Elovitz, with him Watzman & Elovitz, for Thomas R. Knaus, respondent.

Judges Wilkinson, Jr., Blatt and Craig, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Wilkinson, Jr. This decision was reached prior to the expiration of the term of office of Judge DiSalle.

Author: Wilkinson

[ 48 Pa. Commw. Page 540]

This is an appeal by the Mt. Lebanon School District (District) from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) granting unemployment compensation benefits to claimant. We affirm.

Claimant had been employed by the District for over three years as a school custodian prior to his last day of work on March 21, 1978. During his employment claimant received several oral and written warnings concerning his work performance which culminated in his discharge.

On May 2, 1978, the Bureau of Employment Security (Bureau)*fn1 made its determination that claimant was ineligible for benefits as a result of willful misconduct*fn2 consisting of a "failure to adhere to employer's instructions regarding job duties after repeated warnings." Following a referee's affirmance of the Bureau's denial, the Board reversed on the basis of the following findings:*fn3

2. The claimant was discharged because the employer considered his work performance to be generally unsatisfactory.

[ 48 Pa. Commw. Page 5413]

. The claimant had received prior warnings concerning his ...


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.