In re the Claim of Choute

New York Court of Appeals

In re the Claim of Choute

352 N.E.2d 142, 39 N.Y.2d 883, 386 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2820

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 3, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 352 N.E.2d 142 (In re the Claim of Choute) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals 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 Choute, 352 N.E.2d 142, 39 N.Y.2d 883, 386 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2820 (N.Y. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum. In this unemployment insurance case, while the Appellate Division was correct in reversing the Appeal Board’s decision, based as it was erroneously on the limited doctrine of provoked discharge, the matter should be remitted to the board for reconsideration of the facts so that it may determine whether the claimant’s conduct, under the circumstances here, rose to the level of misconduct under subdivision 3 of section 593 of the Labor Law (Matter of James [Levine], 34 NY2d 491).

It follows that the order of the Appellate Division should be modified and the matter remitted to that court with directions that it remand to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board for reconsideration in accordance herewith, and, as so modified, affirmed.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order modified, without costs, and matter remitted to the Appellate Division, Third Department, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

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

Memorandum. In this unemployment insurance case, while the Appellate Division was correct in reversing the Appeal Board’s decision, based as it was erroneously on the limited doctrine of provoked discharge, the matter should be remitted to the board for reconsideration of the facts so that it may determine whether the claimant’s conduct, under the circumstances here, rose to the level of misconduct under subdivision 3 of section 593 of the Labor Law (Matter of James [Levine], 34 NY2d 491).

It follows that the order of the Appellate Division should be modified and the matter remitted to that court with directions that it remand to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board for reconsideration in accordance herewith, and, as so modified, affirmed.

Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur.

Order modified, without costs, and matter remitted to the Appellate Division, Third Department, for further proceedings in accordance with the memorandum herein and, as so modified, affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

352 N.E.2d 142, 39 N.Y.2d 883, 386 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 2820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-choute-ny-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack