Zier v. Bureau of Unemployment Comp., No. 31544.

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Ohio
• Writing for the Court: MATTHIAS
• Citation: 151 Ohio St. 123,84 N.E.2d 746
• Docket Number: No. 31544.
• Decision Date: 09 March 1949
• Parties: ZIER v. BUREAU OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

151 Ohio St. 123
84 N.E.2d 746

ZIER
v.
BUREAU OF UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION.

No. 31544.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

March 9, 1949.

[84 N.E.2d 746]

Syllabus by the Court.

1. An appeal, the right to which is conferred by statute, can be perfected only in the mode prescribed by statute. The exercise of the right conferred is conditioned upon compliance with the accompanying mandatory requirements.

2. An appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review to the Court of Common Pleas is authorized by Section 1346-4, General Code, if perfected by filing a notice of appeal with the clerk of such court and with the board of review within thirty days of the mailing of notice of the decision of the board to the parties, which notice of appeal shall set forth the decision appealed from and the errors therein complained of. Compliance with these specific and mandatory requirements governing the filing of such notice is essential to invoke jurisdiction of the Court of Common Pleas. (American Restaurant & Lunch Co. v. Glander, Tax Com'r., 147 Ohio St. 147, 70 N.E.2d 93, approved and followed.)

Appeal from the Court of Appeals for Cuyahoga county.

Proceeding in the matter of appeal by Edward C. Zier from a decision of the Bureau of Unemployment Compensation denying his claim for unemployment compensation. A judgment dismissing the appeal was reversed and cause remanded by the Court of Appeals, 81 N.E.2d 129, and the cause was brought to Supreme Court following allowance of Bureau's motion to certify the record.-[Editorial Statement.]

Judgment of Court of Appeals reversed, and judgment of Court of Common Pleas affirmed.

Edward C. Zier filed a claim with the Bureau of Unemployment Compensation. His claim was allowed but he was given a referral to a job for which he was found by a claims examiner to be reasonably

[84 N.E.2d 747]

fitted, which job Zier refused to accept. Whereupon the benefit rights of the claimant were suspended ‘until claimant secures other employment and is separated therefrom and is otherwise eligible.’

Thereupon the claimant took an appeal to the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review from the order of suspension of benefits. Upon a hearing before a referee, of which hearing the record shows that claimant and his employer, Thompson Aircraft Products Company, had notice, the decision of the administrator was affirmed. In the decision of the referee is the statement that ‘since claimant was reasonably fitted for the job, it appears that the differential in the wages previously earned by claimant and that which he was offered on the job referral had a definite connection with the finding of fact of the Cleveland office. Further, shortly after, claimant took a trip to Florida, during the winter months, returning some three months later. The reason for claimant's going to Florida is not substantial.’ The decision of the referee concludes as follows: ‘Claimant, on October 17, 1945, refused...