In re the Claim of Day

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Day

26 A.D.2d 851, 273 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3345

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

DecidedOctober 20, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 851 (In re the Claim of Day) 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 Day, 26 A.D.2d 851, 273 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3345 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which affirmed determinations that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits in that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause by provoking his discharge. The employer’s water was shut off during the repair of a broken main and claimant, a dishwasher, was directed to wash dishes in a container of cold water and rinse them with used hot water for the duration of his shift. This he refused to do claiming that his employer was violating the Health Code and if he had followed instructions he would have become a party to the violation. He does not deny that he refused to perform his required duties. The employer states that the dishwashing procedure had been approved by the Board of Health for the emergency period. Regardless of the merits of this dispute, the decision was entirely the employer’s. We are presented with a purely factual question which the board has decided upon substantial evidence and we must affirm. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur.

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

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which affirmed determinations that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits in that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause by provoking his discharge. The employer’s water was shut off during the repair of a broken main and claimant, a dishwasher, was directed to wash dishes in a container of cold water and rinse them with used hot water for the duration of his shift. This he refused to do claiming that his employer was violating the Health Code and if he had followed instructions he would have become a party to the violation. He does not deny that he refused to perform his required duties. The employer states that the dishwashing procedure had been approved by the Board of Health for the emergency period. Regardless of the merits of this dispute, the decision was entirely the employer’s. We are presented with a purely factual question which the board has decided upon substantial evidence and we must affirm. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 851, 273 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-day-nyappdiv-1966.