In re the Claim of Jacobson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Jacobson

20 A.D.2d 733, 246 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4374

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

DecidedFebruary 20, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 20 A.D.2d 733 (In re the Claim of Jacobson) 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 Jacobson, 20 A.D.2d 733, 246 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4374 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the claimant from a denial by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board of unemployment benefits on the ground that he voluntarily quit his employment without good cause. (Labor Law, § 596, subd. 1.) Appellant urges that he was justified in believing he had been discharged. The record, however, is susceptible of the interpretation that although severely reprimanded, appellant was not told he was discharged, but was in fact transferred to other work. The next day he came to his place of employment, picked up his tools and left of his own accord without notifying his employer or making any effort to find out what action, if any, his employer intended to take. The resolution of factual issues is within the province of the board if supported by substantial evidence. (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Lipschitz [Lubin], 7 A D 2d 777.) On the present record we see no reason to disturb the board’s determination. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the claimant from a denial by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board of unemployment benefits on the ground that he voluntarily quit his employment without good cause. (Labor Law, § 596, subd. 1.) Appellant urges that he was justified in believing he had been discharged. The record, however, is susceptible of the interpretation that although severely reprimanded, appellant was not told he was discharged, but was in fact transferred to other work. The next day he came to his place of employment, picked up his tools and left of his own accord without notifying his employer or making any effort to find out what action, if any, his employer intended to take. The resolution of factual issues is within the province of the board if supported by substantial evidence. (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Lipschitz [Lubin], 7 A D 2d 777.) On the present record we see no reason to disturb the board’s determination. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

20 A.D.2d 733, 246 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-jacobson-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack