Skip to main content
· 7/1/1859

Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Hoge

Citations

  • 34 Pa. 214

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • cases wherein this Court held that rigid interpretation of notice requirements in administrative regulations formulated by the Bureau with regard to the form of the employer’s notice could not be utilized to grant benefits to one who had refused suitable work under Section 402(a)
  • cases wherein this Court held that rigid interpretation of notice requirements in administrative regulations formulated by the Bureau with regard to the form of the employer’s notice could not be utilized to grant benefits to one who had refused suitable work under Section 402(a)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Thompson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.