# Peak v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · December 12, 1985 · 509 Pa. 267

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6263403

## Case

- **Full name:** Walter PEAK, Jr. v. COMMONWEALTH of Pennsylvania, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION BOARD OF REVIEW
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** December 12, 1985
- **Citations:** 509 Pa. 267; 501 A.2d 1383; 1985 Pa. LEXIS 446
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by McDermott
- **Judges:** Files, Flaherty, Hutchinson, Larsen, McDermott, Nix, Papadakos, Zappala
- **Cited by:** 337 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/6263403

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that the Board’s factual findings are binding on appeal when substantial record evidence supports them
- explaining that the Board, and not the referee, is the final arbiter of credibility determinations
- applying the test set forth in Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 474, 71 S.Ct. 456, 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951), to determine whether a finding is supported by substantial evidence
- rejecting argument that the referee should have the exclusive power to resolve credibility

## Opinion text

McDERMOTT, Justice,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority, but like Mr. Justice Larsen, I am not convinced that the question whether the Board may reverse a referee’s finding on credibility is an issue in this case. The Board did not reject the referee’s determination; what it did was interpret his findings.
I believe the question of importance and would prefer for precedential reasons to await a more direct conflict.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6263403. Public record. Not legal advice.