Appeal from the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the case of In Re: Claim of Margaret Quinn, No. B-186951.
Anthony B. Quinn, for petitioner.
Charles G. Hasson, Associate Counsel, with him Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.
President Judge Crumlish and Judges Rogers and Blatt, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Blatt. Judge Mencer did not participate in the decision in this case.
[ 67 Pa. Commw. Page 173]
The claimant here was denied benefits by the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) on the basis that she was "self-employed" and thus ineligible under Section 402(h) of the Unemployment Compensation Law.*fn1
The following facts are supported by substantial evidence in the record.*fn2 The claimant was last employed on a full-time basis by the Internal Revenue
[ 67 Pa. Commw. Page 174]
Service for a period of 11 years and she was laid off on June 29, 1979 because of a lack of work. Concurrent with her full-time employment, she was the sole owner*fn3 of a business called the Hobby Shop, located in her home, and she devoted four hours each evening and ten hours on Saturdays to work in the shop. After being laid off from her full-time position, however, she operated this business in her home ten hours a day, six days a week.
Section 402(h) renders a claimant ineligible for benefits for any week in which he or she is engaged in self-employment. But,
[t]he proviso of Section 402(h) precludes disqualification under the following conditions:
(1) that the self-employment precedes valid separation from full-time work; (2) that it continues without substantial change after separation; (3) that the claimant remains available for full time work after separation; and (4) that the self-employment activity is not the primary source of the claimant's livelihood. Parente v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 27 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 455, 366 A.2d 629 (1976). (Emphasis added.)
Higgins, 45 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. at 511, 405 A.2d at 1025 (1979). And, it is clear that, for the above proviso to obtain, all four of its conditions must be met. Seidof v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 49 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 358, ...