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.

PATRICIA A. BRENNER v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (07/08/83)

decided: July 8, 1983.

PATRICIA A. BRENNER, 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 Patricia A. Brenner, No. B-204781.

COUNSEL

Harold I. Goodman, for petitioner.

Charles G. Hasson, Acting Deputy Chief Counsel, with him Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.

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

Author: Blatt

[ 75 Pa. Commw. Page 429]

Patricia A. Brenner (claimant) appeals here an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) which affirmed a referee's denial of benefits under Section 402(a) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. ยง 802(a) (failure to apply for suitable work).

The referee, after a hearing at which no one appeared,*fn1 issued a decision in which the findings of fact were as follows:

1. Claimant was last employed by the Selinsgrove Center as a dietary aide from October 20, 1980 until April 21, 1981, when she was separated for reasons not at issue in this appeal.

2. On December 22, 1981, claimant was called by phone and offered employment as a dietary aide at $3.80 an hour by Victor Temporary Services at the Wood School, Langhorne, Pennsylvania.

3. Claimant refused the offer because it was "too far to travel."

[ 75 Pa. Commw. Page 430]

These findings were apparently based upon documents of the Office of Employment Security (OES) which were introduced into evidence by the referee.

The record as it stands is not sufficient for us to exercise our appellate review. The documents it contains do not support the referee's finding that the claimant was informed as to the wages or the location of the job offer in Langhorne. In fact, the claimant stated on the summary of interview form that "he didn't explain where job was, how far and salary." Moreover, while the referee found that the claimant refused to accept because the job offered was "too far to travel", transportation difficulties may constitute good cause for a refusal of an employment offer. See Treon v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, Pa. , 453 A.2d 960 (1982). Some inquiry, therefore, should have been made along this line, but there is no evidence in the record as to the actual distance between the ...


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.