In re the Claim Nathanson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim Nathanson

51 A.D.2d 1100, 381 N.Y.S.2d 358, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11959

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMarch 25, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 51 A.D.2d 1100 (In re the Claim Nathanson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Claim Nathanson, 51 A.D.2d 1100, 381 N.Y.S.2d 358, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11959 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 2, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits effective March 15, 1975 because she lost her employment through misconduct in connection therewith. This determination of the board is factual in nature and must be upheld, if supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Markovic [Levine] 50 AD2d 1031). Here, there is such substantial support as the record conclusively establishes that claimant failed to comply with a reasonable working condition established by her employer, i.e., a 40-hour week. Moreover, at her hearing claimant testified only that "eventually” she would work a full 40 hours. Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 2, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits effective March 15, 1975 because she lost her employment through misconduct in connection therewith. This determination of the board is factual in nature and must be upheld, if supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Markovic [Levine] 50 AD2d 1031). Here, there is such substantial support as the record conclusively establishes that claimant failed to comply with a reasonable working condition established by her employer, i.e., a 40-hour week. Moreover, at her hearing claimant testified only that "eventually” she would work a full 40 hours. Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 1100, 381 N.Y.S.2d 358, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-nathanson-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack