In re the Claim of Abenoza

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Abenoza

176 A.D.2d 427, 574 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12416

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 26, 1991·Published

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 13, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant’s denial of the employer’s allegations that he was aware of the employer’s rules concerning loans to employees and the procedure for closing out cash registers at the end of the day merely presented questions of fact and credibility for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of McGlynn [Levine] 52 AD2d 709). Given that employees who fail to adhere to company rules are subject to disqualification from receiving unemployment insurance benefits for misconduct (see, Matter of Olan [Ross] 60 AD2d 113), the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Nunes [Roberts] 98 AD2d 934). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Mikoll, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

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 November 13, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant’s denial of the employer’s allegations that he was aware of the employer’s rules concerning loans to employees and the procedure for closing out cash registers at the end of the day merely presented questions of fact and credibility for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of McGlynn [Levine] 52 AD2d 709). Given that employees who fail to adhere to company rules are subject to disqualification from receiving unemployment insurance benefits for misconduct (see, Matter of Olan [Ross] 60 AD2d 113), the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Nunes [Roberts] 98 AD2d 934). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and found to be lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Mikoll, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of Abenoza, 176 A.D.2d 427, 574 N.Y.S.2d 418, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12416 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

176 A.D.2d 427 (In re the Claim of Abenoza) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related