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.

MATTHEW JOSHUA v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (01/16/81)

decided: January 16, 1981.

MATTHEW JOSHUA, 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 Matthew Joshua, No. B-174184-B.

COUNSEL

Andrew F. Erba, for petitioner.

Charles G. Hasson, Assistant Attorney General, with him Richard Wagner, Chief Counsel, and Harvey Bartle, III, Acting Attorney General, for respondent.

Judges Rogers, Blatt and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Rogers.

Author: Rogers

[ 56 Pa. Commw. Page 123]

Matthew Joshua appeals a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) denying him benefits on the ground that his discharge by his employer, Superior Investigative Services, was for willful misconduct.*fn1

While employed by Superior, Joshua was assigned as a guard to commercial establishments, including fast food restaurants and a theater. He was instructed personally to quell minor breaches of order or decorum and in case of a major disturbance to call Superior and to have the place to which he was assigned call the local police.

The Board found that in the month preceding his discharge Joshua was reproved by a supervisor for drinking and sleeping while assigned to guard a theater, that he twice reported to assigned locations without uniform and equipment as required by employer rule, and that two complaints concerning his failure to attempt to put down disturbances were made to Superior by managers of fast food restaurants to which he was assigned. On this appeal Joshua renews an argument rejected below that the competent evidence in the record did not establish misconduct. The record is not a strong one but it is,

[ 56 Pa. Commw. Page 124]

    in our view, sufficient to support the findings and the decision.

Joshua and an employer representative testified at two referee's hearings, the second having been granted at his request because he obtained counsel after the first. Joshua's own testimony established that he was drinking and may have been sleeping while on the theater job. His testimony also sufficiently showed that he was not properly accoutered while at the fast food restaurants. Following are questions put to him by the employer's representative and his answers:

Q. What about the time that you were drinking at the movie theater and I had to send Mr. Greenberg ...


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.