Works v. Bd. Of Review Of Unemployment Comp. Comm'n

Decision Date03 September 1948
Docket NumberNo. 37.,37.
Citation137 N.J.L. 685,61 A.2d 267
PartiesBERGEN POINT IRON WORKS v. BOARD OF REVIEW OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION COMMISSION et al.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from Supreme Court.

Proceeding by the Bergen Point Iron Works, a corporation, prosecutor, against the Board of Review of the Unemployment Compensation Commission and John P. Bonar, to review a determination of the board awarding unemployment compensation to John P. Bonar. From a judgment of the Supreme Court, 136 N.J.Law 645, 57 A.2d 231, reversing the board's determination, dissenting opinion, 57 A.2d 667, the board and John P. Bonar appeal.

Supreme Court's judgment reversed.

Carpenter, Gilmour & Dwyer, of Jersey City (Carl S. Kuebler, of Jersey City, of counsel), for prosecutor-respondent.

Clarence F. McGovern, of Trenton, for respondents-appellants.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court reversing a determination by the respondent-appellant, the Board of Review of the Unemployment Compensation Commission, awarding unemployment compensation to John P. Bonar.

Bonar was employed by the prosecutor-respondent, Bergen Point Iron Works, as a watchman. On August 16, 1946, a strike was called at the Bergen Point plant and shortly thereafter Bonar was laid off. He remained unemployed until February 1, 1947, when he secured new employment with the Constable Hook Shipyard. He testified that when he took his new job he intended it as permanent employment and did not intend to return ultimately to the Bergen Point plant. He further testified that he continued at the shipyard as long as he could, but that he was laid off for lack of work on June 19, 1947. He was sick between June 19, 1947, and July 1, 1947, but was available for work thereafter. The strike at the Bergen Point Plant was still in progress when Bonar's claim for benefits was heard before the administrative tribunal provided for by the unemployment compensation law. See R.S. 43:21-6, N.J.S.A.

The Board of Review of the Unemployment Compensation Commission found that Bonar's unemployment between August 16, 1946, and February 1, 1947, was due to a work stoppage resulting from a labor dispute, and that under R.S. 43:21-5(d), N.J.S.A., he was disqualified from receiving benefits during that period. The soundness of this finding is conceded and is not before us for determination. However, the Board made the further ruling that when Bonar took permanent new employment at the shipyard and was subsequently laid off, R.S. 43:21-5(d), N.J.S.A., was no longer applicable, since ‘his unemployment at that time was due to the layoff by the second employer and not to the stoppage of work at the first plant.’ Accordingly, the Board determined that Bonar was eligible for benefits from July 1, 1947. On certiorari this determination was reversed by the Supreme Court (136 N.J.L. 645, 57 A.2d 231, 232, Colie J., dissenting) which stated that it did not agree that the ‘subsequent employment and loss thereof, even though it be taken for granted that it was intended such employment should be permanent, removed the disqualification.’ This places directly before us the proper construction and application of the language embodied in R.S. 43:21-5(d), N.J.S.A., that a claimant shall be disqualified for benefits: ‘* * * For any week with respect to which it is found that his unemployment is due to a stoppage of work which exists because of a labor dispute at the factory, establishment, or other premises at which he is or was last employed.’

The beneficent...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Dienes v. Holland
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • 3 Diciembre 1979
    ...to return to the first employer when the strike ended (In re Hatch (1972), 130 Vt. 248, 290 A.2d 180; Bergen Point Iron Works v. Board of Review (1948), 137 N.J.L. 685, 61 A.2d 267). Courts in two jurisdictions have judged that "last employed" is to be read as last "regularly or permanently......
  • Teichler v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 24 Junio 1957
    ...must be liberally construed in the light of the beneficent purposes set forth in section 2. See Bergen Point Iron Works v. Board of Review, 137 N.J.L. 685, 686, 61 A.2d 267 (E. & A. 1948); Campbell Soup Co. v. Board of Review, Div. of Employment Security, 13 N.J. 431, 436, 100 A.2d 287 (195......
  • Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Board of Review, Division of Employment Sec., Dept. of Labor and Industry
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 24 Octubre 1957
    ... ... 43:21--5(d) from receiving unemployment compensation benefits. The appellant Westinghouse Electric Corporation ... 6, No. 8 Benefit Series, Unemp.Comp.Int.Ser. 82 (Wash.Super.Ct.1943); Schrieber v. ESD, 8 CCH Unemp. Ins ... Super. Ct.1955) ...         In Bergen Point Iron Works v. Board of Review, 136 N.J.L. 645, 57 A.2d 231, 232, 667 (Sup.Ct.1948), ... ...
  • Scott v. Smith
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 21 Diciembre 1962
    ...gained thereby. [Citing cases.]' In 1948 the matter was before the New Jersey Court in Bergen Point Iron Works v. Board of Review of Unemployment Compensation Commission, 137 N.J.L. 685, 61 A.2d 267. The fact situation as stated in the opinion 'Bonar was employed by the prosecutor-responden......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT