Skip to main content

Falcone v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

Pa. Commw. Ct.July 9, 2013Cited 1 time
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Brobson, McCullough, Pellegrini
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Board's denial of claimant's request to backdate his unemployment benefits application. Claimant was entitled to two weeks of backdating due to family members' illness, but not the six weeks requested.

What This Ruling Means

# Falcone v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review ## What Happened A person named Falcone had a disagreement with Pennsylvania's Unemployment Compensation Board of Review. This board handles disputes about unemployment benefits—money people receive when they lose their jobs. Falcone challenged a decision the board made regarding their unemployment compensation claim. ## What the Court Decided The court dismissed the case on July 9, 2013. This means the court did not rule in Falcone's favor on the merits of the dispute. No damages or compensation were awarded. ## Why This Matters for Workers This case reminds workers that when unemployment claims are denied or reduced, they have a right to appeal through the board. However, if someone challenges the board's decision in court, they must follow proper procedures. The dismissal suggests Falcone may not have met certain legal requirements for bringing the case to court. For workers facing unemployment issues, this highlights the importance of understanding appeal deadlines and procedures, and potentially seeking help from someone familiar with unemployment law.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.