In re the Claim of Hill

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Hill

211 A.D.2d 937, 621 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 248

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 211 A.D.2d 937 (In re the Claim of Hill) 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 Hill, 211 A.D.2d 937, 621 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 248 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 31, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Upon review of the record, we find that there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination that claimant, a knitter, voluntarily left his employment without good cause after an argument with his supervisor. The Board properly found that claimant’s crude response to his supervisor after he was approached with a work-related query was not the action of "a person desirous of protecting and continuing his employment”. In light of the Board’s power to determine issues of credibility, we find no reason to disturb its decision in this matter.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, 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

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 31, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Upon review of the record, we find that there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination that claimant, a knitter, voluntarily left his employment without good cause after an argument with his supervisor. The Board properly found that claimant’s crude response to his supervisor after he was approached with a work-related query was not the action of "a person desirous of protecting and continuing his employment”. In light of the Board’s power to determine issues of credibility, we find no reason to disturb its decision in this matter.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D.2d 937, 621 N.Y.S.2d 231, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 248, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-hill-nyappdiv-1995.