UC - vol. quit - transportation problems

RAME Inc. v. UCBR – Cmwlth Court – 9-6-13 – unreported memorandum opinion

http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/621CD13_9-6-13.pdf?cb=1

For transportation inconvenience to constitute necessitous and compelling cause “a claimant must establish that the inconvenience presented an insurmountable problem and that he took reasonable steps to remedy or overcome the problem prior to terminating employment.” Pollard, 798 A.2d at 817. However, where a claimant makes a laudable effort to maintain employment and is thereafter forced to terminate his employment due to stressful circumstances and insurmountable commuting problems, “the decision to terminate employment rises above mere personal whim or choice and instead represents a reasonable response to causes of a necessitous and compelling nature.” Speck v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 680 A.2d 27, 31 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1996).

There is a presumption that an unemployed worker who registers for UC benefits is able and available for work. Penn Hills Sch. Dist. v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Review, 496 Pa. 620, 437 A.2d 1213 (1981). Here, Employer offered no evidence that Claimant was not available for work.

--------------------------

The opinion, though not reported, may be cited "for its persuasive value, but not as binding precedent." 210 Pa. Code § 67.55. Citing Judicial Opinions.

 

municipal liens - burden of proof - strict compliance

City of Philadelphia v. Manu – Cmwlth. Court – Stpember 6, 2013

http://www.pacourts.us/assets/opinions/Commonwealth/out/84CD12_9-6-13.pdf?cb=1

All lawfully imposed or assessed municipal claims are liens on the property by operation of law….The Municipal Liens Act provides for a specific, detailed and exclusive procedure that must be followed to challenge or collect on a municipal lien placed in cities of first class, such as the City.


Burden of proof

The City had the burden of proving strict compliance with the requirements of the Act. ….In reviewing each of these mandatory steps, it is apparent that there was not even substantial, let alone strict, compliance. The petition neither listed "all tax and municipal claims," nor gave any sense of their magnitude. …. Nonetheless, the City asserts that its actual lien is for $14,702.99 and, presumably, expects to collect at least that amount from the sale if the proceeds are sufficient.

The City had the burden of proving strict compliance with the requirements of the Act. ….In reviewing each of these mandatory steps, it is apparent that there was not even substantial, let alone strict, compliance. The petition neither listed "all tax and municipal claims," nor gave any sense of their magnitude. The only claim listed in the petition is a lien for unpaid water and sewer rents in the amount of $0. Subsequently, the City filed an amended claim for unpaid taxes in the amount of $657.54. Nonetheless, the City asserts that its actual lien is for $14,702.99 and, presumably, expects to collect at least that amount from the sale if the proceeds are sufficient.


Purpose of tax/sheriff's sales

The purpose of sheriff's sales under the Municipal Liens Act, as well as tax sales under the Real Estate Tax Sale Law,…is not to strip the owner of his or her property but to collect municipal claims. ….


Due process requires strict compliance
Strict compliance with the service requirement protects the procedural due process rights of all interested parties to notice and an opportunity to be heard and also guards against deprivation of property without substantive due process of law. ….The collection of claims may not be implemented without due process of law guaranteed by the United States and Pennsylvania Constitutions…..


Requirement of a hearing
Similarly, the requirement that the court hold a hearing to determine the accuracy of the facts in the City’s petition is an important due process safeguard. This is particularly true when the City is proceeding under …Municipal Liens Act,,,…where no judgment has been entered on the lien.