Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Blast Intermediate Unit 17 v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Blast Intermediate Unit 17 v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review Anchor | green | “the presumption of receipt is 'inapplicable' in the absence of proof that the notice was mailed. 'until there is proof that a letter was mailed, there can be no presumption that it was received.” | 3 |
| 2 | Leight v. Commonwealth, Unemployment Compensation Board of Review | green | “the presumption of receipt is 'inapplicable' in the absence of proof that the notice was mailed. 'until there is proof that a letter was mailed, there can be no presumption that it was received.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.