In re the Claim of Jedrak-Perz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Jedrak-Perz

226 A.D.2d 858, 640 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3666

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

DecidedApril 11, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 858 (In re the Claim of Jedrak-Perz) 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 Jedrak-Perz, 226 A.D.2d 858, 640 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3666 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 3, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was terminated from her position as a dress designer when her employer discovered that she had taken her employer’s patterns and prepared announcements addressed to her employer’s customers in anticipation of attending a trade show where she planned to promote her own designs. The Board denied claimant’s application for unemployment insurance benefits, finding that she was terminated for misconduct. Although claimant testified that she did not take her employer’s patterns or customer lists, claimant’s supervisor and a coworker testified to the contrary, and it was for the Board to assess the credibility of the witnesses’ conflicting testimony. Accordingly, we find that the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence.

Crew III, J. P., White, Casey, 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 October 3, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was terminated from her position as a dress designer when her employer discovered that she had taken her employer’s patterns and prepared announcements addressed to her employer’s customers in anticipation of attending a trade show where she planned to promote her own designs. The Board denied claimant’s application for unemployment insurance benefits, finding that she was terminated for misconduct. Although claimant testified that she did not take her employer’s patterns or customer lists, claimant’s supervisor and a coworker testified to the contrary, and it was for the Board to assess the credibility of the witnesses’ conflicting testimony. Accordingly, we find that the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

226 A.D.2d 858, 640 N.Y.S.2d 647, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-jedrak-perz-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack