Legal Opinion · Dissent

Oluschak Unemployment Compensation Case

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided April 13, 1960No. Appeal, No. 472Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Montgomery, J.:

I have dissented in this case because throughout the record it appears that a striking employe must take formal action to give notice to his employer of the termination of his employment before he may seek such employment elsewhere that will be recognized as a basis for unemployment compensation. I do not understand that requirement to be the law. If the evidence proves the fact that the employe in good faith (and not merely as a device to avoid the effects of section 402(d) of the Unemployment Compensation law) seeks and secures new permanent employment…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Mark Hopkins, Inc. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. In re the Claims of LasherNew York Court of Appeals · 1955
  3. In re the Claims of LasherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API