TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

DiAmico v. Commonwealth

Thomas DiAmico v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

DiAmico v. Commonwealth, 310 A.2d 433 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1973)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · State Appellate Courts
Decided
October 17, 1973
Docket
Nos. , No. 856 C.D. 1972
Judges
Bdatt, Crumlish, Mencer
Citations
310 A.2d 43310 Pa. Commw. 2861973 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 530

Opinion of the Court — Crumlish

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Opinion bt Judge Crumlish, Jr.,

This is an appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) denying Claimant-Appellant benefits.

Appellant was employed by Henkel & McCoy, Inc., as a ditch digger and truck driver for six years. On Saturday, October 30, 1971, Appellant injured his back in an accident at his home, and did not report to work until the following Wednesday, which was November 3, 1971, when he was discharged for failing to report his inability to work. This was a violation of an established house rule.

Appellant filed a claim for unemployment compensation benefits and it was denied in turn by the Bureau of Employment Security, the Referee and the Board.

*288 Appellant now brings the Board on appeal to this Court.

Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law, Act of December 5, 1936, P. L. (1937)2897, as amended, 43 P.S. §802(e), provides, in part, that an employee shall be ineligible for compensation for any week: “(e) In which his unemployment is due to his discharge or temporary suspension from work for willful misconduct connected with his work.. . .”

Although “willful misconduct” was not defined by the Legislature it has been previously and consistently determined that deliberate violation of employer’s rules meets the meaning of that phrase. Harmer Unemployment Compensation Case, 206 Pa. Superior Ct. 270 , 213 A. 2d 221 (1965) ; Curran Unemployment Compensation Case, 181 Pa. Superior Ct. 578 , 124 A. 2d 404 (1956).

In the case at hand, Appellant admits he was aware of his employer’s rule which required all employees to notify it when each was unable to report for work. Appellant argues, however, that his injury (back), prevented him from leaving his bed to telephone his employer, and that his wife did not give the employer the required notice because she “. . . doesn’t like to call.”

Under the facts as we have reviewed them, the determination of the Board is supported by the evidence and Appellant’s arguments contra are without merit.

Accordingly,

Order

And Now, this 17th day of October, 1973, the Order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review dated August 3, 1972, is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1974: 21975: 31977: 11981: 119742026peak 1975 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Williams v. Commonwealth380 A.2d 932 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1977)
  2. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of the Commonwealth v. Walton343 A.2d 70 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1975)
  3. Chambers v. Commonwealth318 A.2d 422 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1974)
  4. Warminster Fiberglass Co. v. Commonwealth327 A.2d 219 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1974)
  5. Rice v. Commonwealth338 A.2d 792 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1975)
  6. Rossi v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review427 A.2d 1257 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1981)

Most recent

  1. Rossi v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review427 A.2d 1257 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1981)
  2. Williams v. Commonwealth380 A.2d 932 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1977)
  3. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review of the Commonwealth v. Walton343 A.2d 70 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1975)
  4. Rice v. Commonwealth338 A.2d 792 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1975)
  5. Sturniolo v. Commonwealth338 A.2d 794 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1975)
  6. Warminster Fiberglass Co. v. Commonwealth327 A.2d 219 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1974)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Harmer Unemployment Comp. Case, 213 A.2d 221 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1965) 28
Curran Unemployment Comp. Case, 124 A.2d 404 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1956) 12

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list