In re the Claim of Brokman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Brokman

213 A.D.2d 959, 624 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3353

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 213 A.D.2d 959 (In re the Claim of Brokman) 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 Brokman, 213 A.D.2d 959, 624 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3353 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the [960]*960Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 2, 1993, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant was employed as the head bookkeeper / controller of the employer, a fabric firm. We find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that claimant was not discharged by the employer but rather never returned to work after initially failing to report due to illness. The conflicting evidence offered by claimant merely presented an issue of credibility for the Board to resolve.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Peters and Spain, 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 [960]*960Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 2, 1993, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant was employed as the head bookkeeper / controller of the employer, a fabric firm. We find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s finding that claimant was not discharged by the employer but rather never returned to work after initially failing to report due to illness. The conflicting evidence offered by claimant merely presented an issue of credibility for the Board to resolve.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

213 A.D.2d 959, 624 N.Y.S.2d 977, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-brokman-nyappdiv-1995.