Opinion
November 12, 1963.
December 12, 1963.
Unemployment Compensation — Appeals — Timeliness — Appeal from decision of bureau — Contention by claimant that he was misinformed or misled — Findings of fact.
1. In an unemployment compensation case, in which it appeared that claimant received a notice from the bureau that he was ineligible for benefits because his retirement was voluntary but failed to appeal for more than three months thereafter; that claimant contended that when he applied for benefits an employe of the bureau told him that his application was premature because he had been paid in advance for thirteen weeks upon his retirement; and that the referee found that claimant was not misinformed or in any way misled regarding his right of appeal; it was Held that the claim was properly dismissed.
2. In unemployment compensation cases, the determination of the facts, when based upon competent testimony, is for the compensation authorities.
Before RHODES, P.J., ERVIN, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, and FLOOD, JJ.
Appeal, No. 208, April T., 1963, by claimant, from decision of Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. B-78077, in re claim of Wilbur M. Russ. Decision affirmed.
B. Albert Bertocchi, with him McCue Bertocchi, for appellant.
Sydney Reuben, Assistant Attorney General, with him Walter E. Alessandroni, Attorney General, for Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, appellee.
Argued November 12, 1963.
The claimant received a notice from the Unemployment Compensation Bureau that he was ineligible for benefits because his retirement was voluntary, but failed to appeal until more than three months thereafter. Under Section 501(e) of the Act of December 5, 1936, P.L. (1937) 2897, as amended, an appeal must be taken within ten days from receipt of the notice. The claimant argues that when he applied for benefits an employe of the bureau told him that his application was premature because he had been paid in advance for thirteen weeks upon his retirement. However, he was later held ineligible for an entirely different reason and was so notified. Under this testimony we cannot reverse the finding of the referee that he was not misinformed or in any way misled regarding his right of appeal. The determination of the facts, when based upon competent testimony was for the compensation officials. Progress Manufacturing Company, Inc. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 406 Pa. 163, 176 A.2d 632 (1962). The claim was properly dismissed under our decisions. DeVito Unemployment Compensation Case, 199 Pa. Super. 606, 186 A.2d 639 (1962).
Decision affirmed.