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.

JESSE SAMUEL v. COMMONWEALTH PENNSYLVANIA (03/10/87)

decided: March 10, 1987.

JESSE SAMUEL, PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, STATE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, RESPONDENT



Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania State Civil Service Commission in the case of Jesse Samuel v. Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, Appeal No. 6638.

COUNSEL

Kenneth A. Wise, for petitioner.

Earl R. Dryer, Deputy Counsel, for respondent.

Judges MacPhail, Doyle and Barry, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Doyle.

Author: Doyle

[ 104 Pa. Commw. Page 475]

This is an appeal by Jesse Samuel (Appellant) from an order of the State Civil Service Commission (Commission) which declined to grant Appellant's request for a hearing because it determined that he had not "indicated acts which, if proven, would constitute discrimination, although requested to do so on the [Commission's] Appeal Request Form."

Because there has been no hearing the factual record is sparce. We will, however, recite the allegations in Appellant's brief. Appellant was employed by the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board (Appointing Authority) as a Custodial Worker I, regular status, since 1974. His last day of work was December 17, 1985, after which he was off work due to a foot injury that necessitated surgery the following month. At some point (the date is unclear) Appellant requested medical leave from the Appointing Authority, which was apparently granted. Then in February 1986 the Appointing Authority sent Appellant an additional application for leave along with another medical form, which Appellant alleges he turned over to his doctor who did not complete the form until April 11, 1986. Appellant also alleges that he

[ 104 Pa. Commw. Page 476]

    called the Appointing Authority weekly to report his continuing absence.

By letter from the Appointing Authority dated April 8, 1986 Appellant was informed that he had been deemed to have resigned his position. This letter stated in pertinent part:

As provided in the Civil Service Rules, failure to request reinstatement or further leave on or before your leave expiration date shall be deemed a resignation. Therefore, since you have not requested reinstatement or further leave, as you were instructed in our letters of January 31, 1986 and February 25, 1986 we are recording your resignation effective at the close of business March 28, 1986.

Following receipt of this letter, Appellant filed a timely appeal with the Commission. Appellant specified on Part Two of the Commission's appeal request form, pertaining to regular status employees appealing under Section 951(a) of the Civil Service Act*fn1 (Act), 71 P.S. ยง 741.951(a), that the remedy he sought was reinstatement "due to a mistake on the leave without pay-request form." In addition, he checked a box designating that the action appealed from was his "removal" and explained the reasons for his appeal as follows:

All forms was [sic] given to doctor to be filled out and sent to the office. . . . There was a mistake on completion of forms that I was not aware of until I receive [sic] a ...


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.