Kurtz v. UN. COMP. BD. OF REV.
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge Craig,
Does a claimant remain eligible for unemployment compensation, on the basis that a job termination was for a necessitous and compelling cause, where the claimant has quit in order to marry and join a spouse employed in a distant location?
Claimant Mary E. Kurtz has appealed a denial of her unemployment compensation claim, issued by a referee and the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review on the ground that her unemployment was “due to voluntarily leaving work without cause of a necessitous and compelling nature . . . .” Section 402(b)(1) of the Unemployment…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Richards v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
- Wheeler v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
3Cited by8 opinions
- Procito v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Lechner v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
- Nimitz v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
- Lechner v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.