Romeo Unemployment Compensation Case
This text of 184 A.2d 274 (Romeo Unemployment Compensation Case) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Superior Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion by
TMs is an appeal from an order of tbe Unemployment Compensation Board of Review denying compensation to tbe claimant on tbe ground she was guilty of willful misconduct. See §402(e) of tbe Unemployment Compensation Law, 43 P.S. §802(e).
[34]*34The board found that the claimant was advised by her physician, on January 2, not to go to work because she injured her wrist and that she telephoned her employer and reported her absence due to illness. On January 6, the claimant was found working in the family store and was discharged for misrepresentation of her absence.
The credibility of the witnesses, the weight of their testimony, and the reasonable inferences to be drawn from it are for the board. Ristis Unemployment Compensation Case, 178 Pa. Superior Ct. 400, 403, 116 A. 2d 271 (1955). The evidence shows that following a telephone call, the claimant’s employer sent a representative to the store where he found the claimant with an apron sweeping the floor. The claimant further signed a statement in which the termination of her employment was listed as “Falsification, working while being paid sick leave.” The evidence was sufficient to support a finding of willful misconduct.
Order affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
184 A.2d 274, 199 Pa. Super. 33, 1962 Pa. Super. LEXIS 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/romeo-unemployment-compensation-case-pasuperct-1962.