In re the Claim of Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Goldberg

31 A.D.2d 580, 295 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2868

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

DecidedNovember 21, 1968

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 31 A.D.2d 580 (In re the Claim of Goldberg) 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 Goldberg, 31 A.D.2d 580, 295 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2868 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum by the Court. Decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which disqualified claimant from benefits, on the ground that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause by provoking her discharge, affirmed, without costs. There were involved purely factual issues which' the board resolved upon substantial evidence, including claimant’s signed summary of interview. The time factors are proper subjects of judicial notice. The evidentiary effect to be given the employer’s letters was for the board. They are without legal effect for, as respondent correctly argues, it is immaterial .that the employer may not object to the payment of benefits. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by the court.

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

Memorandum by the Court. Decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which disqualified claimant from benefits, on the ground that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause by provoking her discharge, affirmed, without costs. There were involved purely factual issues which' the board resolved upon substantial evidence, including claimant’s signed summary of interview. The time factors are proper subjects of judicial notice. The evidentiary effect to be given the employer’s letters was for the board. They are without legal effect for, as respondent correctly argues, it is immaterial .that the employer may not object to the payment of benefits. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by the court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 580, 295 N.Y.S.2d 7, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2868, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-goldberg-nyappdiv-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack