Legal Opinion

Dornblum v. Commonwealth

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided October 14, 1983No. Appeal, No. 2866 C.D. 1981PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Doyle,

This is an appeal of a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) which denied benefits to Camille Dornblum (Claimant) because she was not available for work and was therefore ineligible under 401(d) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. §801 (d). Claimant also was deemed to have failed to show cause of a necessitous and compelling nature for her voluntary termination of employment and was, therefore, held ineligible under Section 402 (b) (1) of the Law, 43 P.S.…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Deiss v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  2. Genetin v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  3. Ruckstuhl v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Burke v. Board of ReviewAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
  2. Finik v. Department of Employment SecurityAppellate Court of Illinois · 1988
  3. Zbiegien v. Department of LaborAppellate Court of Illinois · 1987
  4. Ridley School District v. Unemployment Compensation Board of ReviewCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1994
  5. Lapham v. UN. COMP. BD. OF REV.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987

9 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