UC - late appeal - confusion - UCSC mishandling - nunc pro tunc allowed
Victoria v. UCBR – Cmwlth. Court – October 14, 2015 – unreported memorandum opinion
Because the current status of the claimant’s case was “entirely unclear” due to numerous and sometimes conflicting notices, the Court found “persuasive a recent decision by this court, Walsh v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, (Pa. Cmwlth., No. 1248 C.D. 2012, filed May 13, 2013), 2013 Pa. Commw. Unpub. LEXIS 374” and held that as a result of the service center’s mishandling of her claim, the claimant was understandably confused which led to “misstep[s] in her attempts to navigate her way through the Service Center’s errors.”
The court held that the circumstances constituted a breakdown in the administrative process and allowed the claimant’s untimely appeal.10 10 See also Carr v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, (Pa. Cmwlth., No. 662 C.D. 2014, filed December 19, 2014), 2014 Pa. Commw. Unpub. LEXIS 728 The UCSC mishandling of the claim constitutes a breakdown in the administrative process warranting a nunc pro tunc appeal.
An unreported case may not be cited “binding precedent” but can be cited “for its persuasive value. . . .” See 210 Pa. Code § 69.414 (a) and Pa. R.A.P. 3716 [45 Pa.B. 3975; Saturday, July 25, 2015]
If the case is old, the link may have become stale and may not work, but you can use the case and date to find the opinion in another source (e.g., Westlaw, Lexis, Google Scholar)