Jee Y. Eom v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

Summary

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court affirmed the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review’s dismissal of Jee Y. Eom’s appeal as untimely under Section 501(e) of the Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Law. The majority held that the claimant failed to establish circumstances warranting nunc pro tunc relief, particularly because the Board did not credit counsel’s testimony that the appeal had been mailed before the deadline. Judge Cosgrove dissented, reasoning that the credited or uncontradicted testimony supported equitable nunc pro tunc relief even though it was insufficient to establish timely filing under the applicable regulation.

Holdings

1. An appeal from a notice of determination under Section 501(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law must be filed within fifteen calendar days; an untimely appeal deprives the Board of jurisdiction and makes the determination final.
2. Eom was not entitled to nunc pro tunc relief because the Board did not credit counsel's testimony and there was no credited evidence establishing non-negligent conduct beyond Eom's control that prevented timely filing.
3. The Commonwealth Court could not overturn the Board's decision not to credit counsel's testimony because credibility determinations are within the Board's province as ultimate fact finder.
4. Even if credited, counsel's testimony that he mailed the appeal before the deadline would not establish entitlement to nunc pro tunc relief under the precedent relied upon by the majority.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Board properly dismissed Eom's appeal as untimely under Section 501(e) of the Unemployment Compensation Law.
2. Whether Eom established grounds for equitable nunc pro tunc relief based on alleged non-negligent conduct by his attorney.
3. Whether the Commonwealth Court could overturn the Board's credibility determination concerning counsel's testimony.

Disposition

affirmed