Legal Opinion

Kurtz v. UN. COMP. BD. OF REV.

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 17, 1986No. Appeal, 1038 C.D. 1985PublishedCited by 8 opinions

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

  1. Richards v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  2. Wheeler v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Procito v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  2. Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Lechner v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  4. Nimitz v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1997
  5. Lechner v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994

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

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

Powered by the Exa API