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.

FAYE JEAN FIKE v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (09/15/83)

decided: September 15, 1983.

FAYE JEAN FIKE, PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT. MARGARET GENTILE, PETITIONER V. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT



Appeals from the Orders of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review in the cases of In Re: Claim of Faye J. Fike, No. B-192836-B, and In Re: Claim of Margaret Gentile, No. B-192835-B.

COUNSEL

David J. Flower, for petitioners.

Jonathan B. Sprague, Associate Counsel, with him Richard L. Cole, Jr., Chief Counsel, for respondent.

Judges Williams, Jr., Craig and Doyle, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Doyle.

Author: Doyle

[ 77 Pa. Commw. Page 177]

Before this Court are the consolidated appeals of Faye Jean Fike and Margaret Gentile (Claimants) from decisions and orders of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) denying them benefits based on the conclusion that they had engaged in disqualifying "willful misconduct" under Section 402(e) 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(e).

The Board's decision to deny Claimants benefits in each instance was predicated on the following findings of fact:*fn1

1. The claimant was last employed as a clerk by 21st Century Appraisals, Inc. for approximately

[ 77 Pa. Commw. Page 178]

    three and one-half years at a final rate of $5.3254 per hour, and her last day of work was October 1, 1980.

2. The claimant performed her work in the Somerset County Assessor's Office.

3. The claimant's regular starting time was 8:30 a.m.

4. On October 1, 1980, prior to the work day, the claimant was engaged in giving a hair treatment to an employee of ...


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.