Lerza-Keubler v. Monroe County Tax Claim Bureau - Cmwlth. Court - October 15, 2009
http://origin-www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Cwealth/out/174CD09_10-15-09.pdf
The court set aside a tax sale because, after the post office returned the tax sale notices unclaimed, the Bureau failed to make a reasonable effort to notify the owner of the tax sale by calling the telephone number the tax claim bureau had for the deceased owner, which was the same telephone number of the executrix, who was living at the property. Such a failure can be cured by showing actual notice, but proof of that was lacking here.
Thursday, October 15, 2009
UC - willful misconduct - prior incidents v. final incident
Philadelphia Parking Authority v. UCBR - Cmwlth. Court - October 15, 2009 - unreported memorandum opinion
http://origin-www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Cwealth/out/2335CD08_10-15-09.pdf
"Notwithstanding a history of job-related misconduct, an employer must still prove that the final incident of misconduct for which a claimant was purportedly terminated contained an element of willfulness; should the employer fail to establish that the final incident constituted willful conduct, the employer has also failed to prove the required causal connection between the claimant’s purported culpable behavior, and the termination. See SEPTA v. UCBR, 525 A.2d 458 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987); Crib Diaper Service v. UCBR, 98 A.2d 490 (Pa. Super. 1953). As such, Employer’s arguments regarding Claimant’s prior alleged instances of misconduct are of no moment to the issue on appeal sub judice."
__._,_.___
http://origin-www.courts.state.pa.us/OpPosting/Cwealth/out/2335CD08_10-15-09.pdf
"Notwithstanding a history of job-related misconduct, an employer must still prove that the final incident of misconduct for which a claimant was purportedly terminated contained an element of willfulness; should the employer fail to establish that the final incident constituted willful conduct, the employer has also failed to prove the required causal connection between the claimant’s purported culpable behavior, and the termination. See SEPTA v. UCBR, 525 A.2d 458 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987); Crib Diaper Service v. UCBR, 98 A.2d 490 (Pa. Super. 1953). As such, Employer’s arguments regarding Claimant’s prior alleged instances of misconduct are of no moment to the issue on appeal sub judice."
__._,_.___
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)