In re the Claim of Adatto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Adatto

168 A.D.2d 870, 564 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15768

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

DecidedDecember 27, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 168 A.D.2d 870 (In re the Claim of Adatto) 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 of Adatto, 168 A.D.2d 870, 564 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 15, 1989, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its original decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause and imposing a forfeiture of effective days as a penalty in reduction of future benefits.

Claimant contends that she did not voluntarily leave her employment because she was orally mistreated and because she believed that she had been fired. She admitted, however, that she never complained to her employer about any mistreatment. The record further reveals that claimant was told to work on a given day, that she failed to do so even though she had said she would, and that when her employer called her she told him she was not coming back. Under the circumstances, the conclusion that claimant left her job because she was dissatisfied with it and that this conduct constituted voluntarily leaving without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Rubinstein [Catherwood], 33 AD2d 950). Additionally, the question of whether claimant made a willful misrepresentation to obtain unemployment insurance benefits involved a factual determination and the record reveals no basis for disturbing the [871]*871decision as to this issue (see, Matter of Ramsey [Ross], 63 AD2d 1061).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Weiss, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Mercure, 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 August 15, 1989, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its original decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause and imposing a forfeiture of effective days as a penalty in reduction of future benefits.

Claimant contends that she did not voluntarily leave her employment because she was orally mistreated and because she believed that she had been fired. She admitted, however, that she never complained to her employer about any mistreatment. The record further reveals that claimant was told to work on a given day, that she failed to do so even though she had said she would, and that when her employer called her she told him she was not coming back. Under the circumstances, the conclusion that claimant left her job because she was dissatisfied with it and that this conduct constituted voluntarily leaving without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Rubinstein [Catherwood], 33 AD2d 950). Additionally, the question of whether claimant made a willful misrepresentation to obtain unemployment insurance benefits involved a factual determination and the record reveals no basis for disturbing the [871]*871decision as to this issue (see, Matter of Ramsey [Ross], 63 AD2d 1061).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Weiss, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D.2d 870, 564 N.Y.S.2d 561, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-adatto-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack