Mariano v. Commonwealth
Opinion
Opinion by
Pasco Mariano, while on strike against his employer, was discharged for physically assaulting a fellow non-striking employee. Mariano appeals the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review’s determination that he is ineligible for benefits due to willful misconduct.1 We affirm.
[40] Mariano unsuccessfully contends that the Board improperly remanded the record to a referee for additional testimony. The law is clear that the decision to grant a remand is strictly within Board discretion. Shriner v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 42 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 368, 400 A.2d 934 (1979); 34 Pa. Code §§101.104 and 101.108. A close examination of the record reveals no abuse of this broad discretion.2
Mariano also asserts that his actions do not constitute willful misconduct. Although conflicting testimony was presented, the Board, within its province, chose to believe witnesses who testified that Mariano physically attacked another employee. We have long held that such conduct constitutes willful misconduct.3 Wisniewski v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 34 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 332, 383 A.2d 254 (1978).
Affirmed.
Order
The decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-173340, dated June 19, 1979, is affirmed.
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
432 A.2d 650 (Mariano v. Commonwealth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.