M. Sheriff v. UCBR
179 C.D. 2024
Pa. Commw. Ct.Jun 18, 2025Background
- Makasian Sheriff applied for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA) benefits in July 2020.
- In December 2020, the UC Service Center determined she was ineligible for PUA because she was eligible for regular Pennsylvania unemployment compensation (UC) benefits.
- Sheriff missed her initial appeal hearing, later testifying that her absence was due to being asleep while pregnant.
- The Board found that Sheriff did not have good cause for missing the first hearing and refused to consider new evidence on the merits.
- Sheriff appealed, arguing she was forced to stop working due to COVID-19-related childcare issues when schools and daycare facilities closed.
- The Board's decision to deny PUA benefits was affirmed by the Commonwealth Court.
Issues
| Issue | Sheriff's Argument | Board's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eligibility for PUA when eligible for regular UC | She should get PUA due to COVID-19 childcare closures | PUA only available if not eligible for regular UC | PUA denied; eligible for regular UC |
| Good cause for missing original hearing | Missed hearing was due to pregnancy and exhaustion | Sheriff did not establish sufficient good cause | No good cause; Board did not consider merits |
| Review of Board's process and findings | Board erred in not considering circumstances or merits | Board's findings supported by evidence; correct application of law | Board's process and findings affirmed |
| Application of the CARES Act PUA eligibility criteria | She qualifies as affected by the pandemic and school/daycare closures | CARES Act excludes those eligible for regular UC regardless of pandemic situation | Law correctly applied to ineligibility |
Key Cases Cited
- Kozicki v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Rev., 299 A.3d 1055 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2023) (PUA only applies to claimants not eligible for regular unemployment compensation)
- Russell v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Rev., 812 A.2d 780 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002) (pro se litigant arguments can be liberally construed)
- Pierce-Boyce v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Rev., 289 A.3d 130 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2022) (scope of review for Board's findings)
- McCarthy v. Unemployment Comp. Bd. of Rev., 829 A.2d 1266 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003) (Board is ultimate fact finder in UC cases)