A. Coleman v. UCBR
210 C.D. 2016
| Pa. Commw. Ct. | Dec 21, 2016Background
- Claimant Anton Coleman worked as an EMT until laid off November 2011; he had incorporated Universal Ambulance in 2009 and was its 100% owner.
- Universal Ambulance received a PA Department of Health certificate late 2011 and insurance approval in 2012; it generated no income before 2012.
- Claimant filed for unemployment (Nov. 2011), answered “no” when asked if he was self-employed, and received $8,797 in benefits through May 2012 (plus two EUC weeks).
- The Department found Claimant ineligible under 43 P.S. §802(h) (self-employment), assessed a fault overpayment and penalties, and the referee initially reversed.
- The Unemployment Compensation Board of Review reversed the referee, found Claimant was self-employed (not a sideline), and assessed a fault overpayment and penalty weeks; the Commonwealth Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Coleman was "engaged in self-employment" under §402(h) so as to be ineligible for benefits | Formation/incorporation of a dormant business that produced no income cannot as a matter of law constitute self-employment | Incorporation and steps taken to establish Universal Ambulance were positive entrepreneurial acts showing self-employment, not a mere sideline | Court affirmed Board: incorporation and related steps were sufficient positive acts; Coleman was self-employed and thus ineligible |
| Whether a fault overpayment and penalty can be imposed where claimant denied self-employment on forms but claimed no intent to deceive | Coleman had no intent to mislead because business was dormant and he was a layperson who thought reporting not required | Coleman repeatedly answered “no” to self-employment questions, had received the handbook instructing reporting, and knowingly withheld business information | Court affirmed Board: credibility finding supported fault overpayment and penalties under §804(a); claimant liable to repay benefits |
Key Cases Cited
- Leary v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 322 A.2d 749 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1974) (incorporation can be a positive step disqualifying claimant)
- Salamak v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 497 A.2d 951 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1985) (shareholder interest in a corporation can constitute self-employment even before revenue)
- Roberts v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 422 A.2d 911 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1980) (formation of a corporation supports finding of self-employment despite lack of immediate income)
- Roche v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 503 A.2d 1103 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1986) (positive acts like incorporation, business checking account use, and lease show establishment of independent business)
- Buchanan v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 581 A.2d 1005 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1990) (entrepreneurial intent and positive steps convert activity into self-employment; unemployment not insurance for failed ventures)
- Castello v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 86 A.3d 294 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2013) (definition of "fault" for overpayment liability involves blameworthiness)
- Amspacher v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 479 A.2d 688 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984) (discusses culpability standard for fault overpayments)
- Minelli v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 39 A.3d 593 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012) (contrast: occasional or limited consulting not necessarily self-employment)
- Silver v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 34 A.3d 893 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2011) (contrast: sporadic offers of work did not establish independent business)
- Teets v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 615 A.2d 987 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1992) (sideline sales or distribution programs can qualify as non-disqualifying sideline activity)