Opinion

Painter v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

  • 183 Pa. Super. 363
  • 132 A.2d 365
Court
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
Jun 11, 1957
Status
Published
On the bench
Ervin, Gunther, Hirt, Rhodes, Watkins, Woodside, Wright
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 67.8%

The opinion

Opinion

Per Curiam,

This is an appeal by the employer, George B. Painter, from an order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Beview dismissing Ms petition for appeal from the referee’s decision on the ground that it had not been filed within the ten-day statutory appeal period prescribed by section 502 of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 PS §822.

Claimant, Edward Benckley, was allowed benefits by the bureau; on appeal by the employer the referee affirmed the bureau’s determination and ruled claimant eligible for benefits. It was held that he had been discharged and that there was no evidence of willful misconduct which would deprive him of benefits under section 402 (e) of the Law, 43 PS §802 (e).

The referee’s decision was issued on July 13, 1956, and proper notice was given. An appeal was not taken by the employer until August 4, 1956. No explanation for the delay was offered. The board dismissed the appeal from the referee’s decision for the reason that it had not been filed within the ten-day statutory period. The appeal was properly dismissed by the board as it was not within the time fixed for taking an appeal from the decision of the referee, and there were no extenuating circumstances. See Marshall Unemployment Compensation Case, 177 Pa. Superior Ct. 259 , 111 A. 2d 165 .

Order is affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.