Geever v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A]n employee shall be ineligible for compensation for any week — (h) [i]n which he is engaged in self-employment. ...”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Buchanan v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review · Essick v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

2. “Our cases in this area of the law indicate that in each instance each case will be determined upon its own facts. Thus, the percentage of stock owned is not in and of itself determinative of the issue ... the fact that Claimant is an officer of the corporation is not in and of [itself] determinative of the issue ... and, the Claimant’s title is not determinative in and of itself.... It is only when consideration is given to all of those factors as well as any others which might be indi-cia of control, that a determination of whether the Claimant is self-employed can be made. As we have noted previously, when Claimant was president of the corporation, managed the restaurant and made decisions on her own during the period from August of 1977 until September of 1979, she was exercising substantial control of the business. At the time of her termination, however, such was not the case. Although still a member of the board and a shareholder and although nominally the manager of the restaurant business, it is clear from the record that the Claimant no longer exercised substantial control or any control but rather took orders from the other shareholders, the last of which involuntarily terminated her. .... Our conclusion, therefore, that the Claimant is not a self-employed businesswoman but is an employee entitled to unemployment compensation benefits, is based upon our own analysis of the facts as found by the Board and our determination from those facts that at the time of termina”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dunkelberger v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review

3. “Our cases in this area of the law indicate that in each instance each case will be determined upon its own facts. Thus, the percentage of stock owned is not in and of itself determinative of the issue, Rolland v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 53 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 562 , 418 A.2d 807 (1980); the fact that Claimant is an officer of the corporation is not in and of itself determinative of the issue, George v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, 57 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 578 , 426 A.2d 1248 (1981); and, the Claimant’s title is not determinative in and of itself, Starinieri. It is only when consideration is given to all of these factors as well as any others which might be indicia of control, that a determination of whether the Claimant is self-employed can be made. (Emphasis added.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pisano v. Commonwealth