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.

INEZ WASKO v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (02/27/85)

decided: February 27, 1985.

INEZ WASKO, 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 Inez M. Wasko, No. B-219169.

COUNSEL

Kenneth R. Alford, for petitioner.

Richard F. Faux, Associate Counsel, with him, Charles G. Hasson, Acting Deputy Chief Counsel, for respondent.

Judges Rogers and Williams, Jr. and Senior Judge Kalish, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Senior Judge Kalish. Judge Williams, Jr., dissents. This decision was reached prior to the resignation of Judge Williams, Jr.

Author: Kalish

[ 88 Pa. Commw. Page 17]

Inez Wasko appeals from the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) affirming the decision of a referee denying her unemployment compensation benefits on the ground that she voluntarily quit work without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature.*fn1 We reverse.

Wasko contends that the Board erred in concluding that she left work without a cause of a necessitous and compelling nature. Although the Board is the ultimate finder of facts, the conclusion of whether a claimant had cause of a necessitous and compelling nature for leaving work is a question of law subject to this Court's review. Willet v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 59 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 500, 429 A.2d 1282 (1981).

[ 88 Pa. Commw. Page 18]

The referee found and the Board affirmed the following facts, which are not in dispute:

1. The claimant was last employed by Borough of Wheatland for three years and four months as secretary-treasurer at a final annual salary of $9,800.00. Her last day of work was December 31, 1981.

2. Throughout her employment, the claimant had constant problems with the Mayor of Wheatland who interfered with the claimant's performance of her job duties.

3. The Mayor had no business interfering with the claimant's work since she had no control over the claimant nor did she have 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.