Legal Opinion

Faulkiner Unemployment Compensation Case

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 21, 1963No. Appeal, 24PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Wood side, J.,

The claimant in this unemployment compensation case was denied benefits by the bureau, the referee and the board on the ground that she terminated her employment without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature within the meaning of Section 402(b)(1) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 P.S. §802, which provides:

“An employe shall be ineligible for compensation for any week— . . . (b)(1) In which his unemployment is due to voluntarily leaving work without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature . . .”

The claimant had been employed in Muncy by the Weldon…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ambridge Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1956
  2. Davidson Unemployment Compensation CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
  3. Vernon Unemployment Compensation CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1948
  4. Horning Unemployment Compensation CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1955
  5. Szojka Unemployment Compensation CaseSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1958

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Zorrero v. Unemployment Insurance Appeals BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
  2. Cantrell v. Employment DivisionCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 1976
  3. Borman v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. Mitchell v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review v. DelGrossoCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

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

Powered by the Exa API