In re the Claim of Focella

199 A.D.2d 739, 605 N.Y.S.2d 473, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11995
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 16, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 199 A.D.2d 739 (In re the Claim of Focella) 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 Focella, 199 A.D.2d 739, 605 N.Y.S.2d 473, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11995 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

Mahoney, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 7, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Resolution of the instant controversy devolves to a question of credibility—claimant arguing that she was terminated from her employment during an August 24, 1991 meeting with her employer and the employer stating that the meeting concerned only claimant’s recent poor performance, uncooperativeness and inability to get along with co-workers. According to the employer, claimant was not discharged during the meeting but left of her own accord several days later, stating simply "I quit”. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board rejected claimant’s version of events as incredible, finding that her action in calling in sick the day after the meeting was inconsistent with her claim of discharge the previous day and noting her testimonial admission that the employer never specifically told her that she was fired along with her admitted doubts about whether she had in fact been fired. Credibility determinations being within the exclusive province of the Board (see, e.g., Matter of Jones [Hudacs], 197 AD2d 733) and the Board’s determination otherwise being supported by substantial evidence, we see no reason to interfere.

Weiss, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr. and Casey, 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

Related

In re the Claim of Hayes
19 A.D.3d 916 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
In re the Claim of McKeown
233 A.D.2d 744 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
In re the Claim of Ferraro
231 A.D.2d 781 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
199 A.D.2d 739, 605 N.Y.S.2d 473, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11995, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-focella-nyappdiv-1993.