# McCann v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

> Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · December 11, 1998 · 723 A.2d 246

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4956141

## Case

- **Full name:** Virginia K. McCANN v. UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW
- **Court:** Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 11, 1998
- **Citations:** 723 A.2d 246; 1998 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 901
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Leadbetter
- **Judges:** Colins, Doyle, Friedman, Leadbetter, McGinley, Pellegrini, Smith
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4956141

## Opinion text

LEADBETTER, Judge,
dissenting.
I join fully in the majority’s well-reasoned analysis of the applicable law concerning the Board’s exposure to liability for fees, costs and sanctions under the various rules of appellate procedure. I must respectfully dissent, however, from the imposition of fees in this ease.
It is a long-established principle that an appellate court may affirm a decision on a different ground than that relied upon by the tribunal under review. In re Class Action Appeal of Mackey, 687 A.2d 1186 , 1189 n. 8 (Pa.Cmwlth.1997); Bell Atlantic Mobile Sys., Inc. v. Borough of Baldwin, 677 A.2d 363 , 367 n. 2 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996).
The Board, in its role as advocate in this case, did no more than urge this court to affirm on other grounds, a position frequently taken by appellees. I see nothing vexatious nor obdurate in an appellee’s making such an argument, and I would not distinguish in this regard between the Board and an appellee which was an advocate at all stages of the proceedings. Accordingly, I would not impose sanctions in this case.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4956141. Public record. Not legal advice.