In re the Claim of Berrios

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Berrios

238 A.D.2d 698, 656 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3753

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

DecidedApril 10, 1997

StatusPublished

This text of 238 A.D.2d 698 (In re the Claim of Berrios) 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 Berrios, 238 A.D.2d 698, 656 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3753 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 15, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, a maintenance manager, reported a crack in one of the employer’s storage tanks. Claimant was discharged for insubordination for refusal to comply with the employer’s various requests for a written report explaining how the crack occurred. Claimant challenges the decision contending that he had in fact submitted a written report which was rejected by the employer.

We find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. The varying contentions of claimant and his employer merely raised a question of credibility which the Board was entitled to resolve (see, Matter of Santos [Hudacs], 206 AD2d 575).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Crew III, White and Peters, 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 July 15, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, a maintenance manager, reported a crack in one of the employer’s storage tanks. Claimant was discharged for insubordination for refusal to comply with the employer’s various requests for a written report explaining how the crack occurred. Claimant challenges the decision contending that he had in fact submitted a written report which was rejected by the employer.

We find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. The varying contentions of claimant and his employer merely raised a question of credibility which the Board was entitled to resolve (see, Matter of Santos [Hudacs], 206 AD2d 575).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Crew III, White and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 698, 656 N.Y.S.2d 429, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3753, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-berrios-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack