Micca v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act
| Decision Date | 10 February 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 140267,140267 |
| Citation | 26 Conn.Supp. 16,209 A.2d 682 |
| Court | Connecticut Superior Court |
| Parties | Peter P. MICCA v. ADMINISTRATOR, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION ACT. |
Morton C. Hansen, Jr., Simsbury, for plaintiff.
Harold M. Mulvey, Atty. Gen., and Harry Silvertone, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act.
This is an appeal by the plaintiff from a decision of an unemployment commissioner holding that he was not making reasonable efforts to find suitable work within the meaning of General Statutes § 31-235(2) and that he was therefore ineligible for benefits. The question for decision is whether the commissioner's conclusion is unreasonable, arbitrary and illegal.
The plaintiff was employed as a general manager of an automobile sales agency. Since his separation from that employment, he had planned to engage in the used-car business on his own and, since that date, he had acquired a commitment for a lease to certain premises in Hartford. He was awaiting a variance from the zoning board of appeals and for the conclusion of negotiations with a finance company before he actually commenced operations. In the event that the foregoing negotiations were consummated successfully, he would commence business forthwith and would leave any job that he may have obtained in the meantime. Since August 9, 1964, to the date of the hearing on September 21, his sole efforts to find employment consisted of going to two automobile establishments.
On the basis of the foregoing facts, the commissioner concluded that the plaintiff failed to make reasonable efforts to find suitable work. The plaintiff has appealed to this court, claiming that he was available for and making reasonable efforts to engage in self-employment and that such availability and efforts satisfy the statutory requirement.
Pursuant to the Unemployment Compensation Act, a fund is created by employers' involuntary contributions from which employees who lose their jobs may, after a waiting period, be paid certain benefits 'while looking for work but unable to find it.'
Waterbury Savings Bank v. Danaher, 128 Conn. 78, 82, 20 A.2d 455, 458. To be available for work within the meaning of the statute, one must be ready, able and willing to accept suitable employment. He must be exposed unequivocally to the labor market. Leclerc v. Administrator, 137 Conn. 438, 439, 78 A.2d 550. The purpose and intent of the act was to relieve the hardship of involuntary unemployment caused by the failure of industry to provide stable employment. Baldassaris v. Egan, 135 Conn. 695, 698, 68 A.2d 120.
The word 'employment' is defined by statute to mean 'any service * * * performed under any...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ertman v. Fusari
...the hardship of involuntary unemployment caused by the failure of industry to provide stable employment." Micca v. Administrator, 26 Conn.Sup. 16, 17, 209 A.2d 682, 684 (1965); see also Baldassaris v. Egan, 135 Conn. 695, 698, 68 A.2d 120 (1949). Benefits are paid without reference to need;......
-
Johnson v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, 2096
...himself to the labor market but has in fact withdrawn from it to become involved in his own enterprise." Micca v. Administrator, 26 Conn.Sup. 16, 18, 209 A.2d 682 (1965); see also Maskovsky v. High Brook Farm, 7 Conn.Sup. 364 On this record, the plaintiff has shown no good reason why this c......
-
Manukyan v. Adm'r, Unemployment Compensation Act.
...Johnson v.Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, supra, 3 Conn.App. 264, 487 A.2d 565;Micca v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, 26 Conn.Supp. 16, 209 A.2d 682 (1965). The board did not treat the plaintiff's business involvement as an automatic disqualification, but looke......
-
Holman Enterprise Tobacco Warehouse v. Carter
..."wages". Mississippi Employment Security Commission v. Medlin, 252 Miss. 146, 171 So.2d 496; Micca v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, 26 Conn.Sup. 16, 209 A.2d 682. In Reddick v. Northern Accident Co., 180 Mo.App. 277, 165 S.W. 354, the court held that farm income was not wage......