In re the Claim of Effress

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Effress

52 A.D.2d 708, 382 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12391

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

DecidedApril 29, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 52 A.D.2d 708 (In re the Claim of Effress) 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 Effress, 52 A.D.2d 708, 382 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12391 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 10, 1975, which reversed the decision of a referee and sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. The board has found that claimant’s refusal to perform certain messenger duties in connection with his employment constituted insubordination rising to the level of misconduct. Such a determination is one of fact, [709]*709and, if it is supported by substantial evidence, must be affirmed (Matter of Lester [Catherwood], 30 AD2d 1025). This record supports such a determination (Matter of Maier [Levine] 49 AD2d 776). Decision affirmed, without costs. Kane, J. P., Mahoney, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, 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 December 10, 1975, which reversed the decision of a referee and sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. The board has found that claimant’s refusal to perform certain messenger duties in connection with his employment constituted insubordination rising to the level of misconduct. Such a determination is one of fact, [709]*709and, if it is supported by substantial evidence, must be affirmed (Matter of Lester [Catherwood], 30 AD2d 1025). This record supports such a determination (Matter of Maier [Levine] 49 AD2d 776). Decision affirmed, without costs. Kane, J. P., Mahoney, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 708, 382 N.Y.S.2d 587, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-effress-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack