Small v. Commonwealth
Small v. Commonwealth
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
David Small (Claimant) appeals from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (Board) which denied benefits to him under the provisions of Section 402(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law (Law), Act of December 5, 1936, Second Ex. Sess., P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, 43 P.S. §802 (e).
In such circumstances our scope of review is limited to questions of law and, absent fraud, to a determination of whether or not the findings of fact are supported by the evidence. Rodites v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 34 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 128, 382 A.2d 1287 (1978). See also Section 510 of the Law, 43 P.S. §830. Claimant contends, that the evidence received by the referee will not support his findings of fact. After a careful review of the record, we are satisfied that there is ample substantial evidence to support those findings. The Claimant also contends that the findings were based on hearsay evidence, that the findings do not constitute willful misconduct and that the employer had not met its burden to prove willful misconduct. While Claimant’s statement of applicable principles of law is correct, his application of them to the facts of this case is not.
Order
And Now, this 21st day of November, 1978, the order of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, dated April 14, 1977, denying benefits to David Small, is hereby affirmed.
An employe shall be ineligible for compensation for any week—
*548 (e) In which his unemployment is due to his discharge or temporary suspension from work for willful misconduct connected with his work, irrespective of whether or not such work is ‘employment’ as defined in this act; and. . . .
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.