In re the Claim of Haber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Haber

40 A.D.2d 927, 338 N.Y.S.2d 167, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3242

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

DecidedNovember 30, 1972

StatusPublished

This text of 40 A.D.2d 927 (In re the Claim of Haber) 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 Haber, 40 A.D.2d 927, 338 N.Y.S.2d 167, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3242 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 8, 1972, disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. The factual situation is similar to that present in Matter of Hiken (Levine) (40 A D 2d 926). In TLiken, it appeared that, “In response to the Industrial Commissioner’s inquiry on the form ‘Request for Wage and Separation Information ’ ” as to the reason for claimant’s separation, the Federal agency replied: “ Resignation — RIF situation — Involuntary Separation ”. Accordingly, we reversed inasmuch as the determination of the Federal agency as to the reason for appellant’s separation from employment is binding upon the board (U. S. Code, tit. 5, § 8506; Matter of Schifferle [Catherwood], 33 A D 2d 847). Remittal to the board is necessary in the instant ease since the record herein is devoid of any reference to the determination of the Federal agency as to the cause of appellant’s separation from employment. Further development of the record with proper findings is therefore required. Decision reversed, and matter remitted for further proceedings! not inconsistent herewith, without costs. Staley, Jr., J. P., Greenblott, Sweeney, Simons and Kane, 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 May 8, 1972, disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. The factual situation is similar to that present in Matter of Hiken (Levine) (40 A D 2d 926). In TLiken, it appeared that, “In response to the Industrial Commissioner’s inquiry on the form ‘Request for Wage and Separation Information ’ ” as to the reason for claimant’s separation, the Federal agency replied: “ Resignation — RIF situation — Involuntary Separation ”. Accordingly, we reversed inasmuch as the determination of the Federal agency as to the reason for appellant’s separation from employment is binding upon the board (U. S. Code, tit. 5, § 8506; Matter of Schifferle [Catherwood], 33 A D 2d 847). Remittal to the board is necessary in the instant ease since the record herein is devoid of any reference to the determination of the Federal agency as to the cause of appellant’s separation from employment. Further development of the record with proper findings is therefore required. Decision reversed, and matter remitted for further proceedings! not inconsistent herewith, without costs. Staley, Jr., J. P., Greenblott, Sweeney, Simons and Kane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

40 A.D.2d 927, 338 N.Y.S.2d 167, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-haber-nyappdiv-1972.