In re the Claim of Lagattolia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Lagattolia

50 A.D.2d 626, 374 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12434

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 626 (In re the Claim of Lagattolia) 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 Lagattolia, 50 A.D.2d 626, 374 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12434 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 16, 1974, which disqualified claimant from receiving benefits on the ground he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Where there is contradictory proof in the testimony and in claimant’s application for benefits and his summary of insurance interview, issues of fact and credibility are presented for the board’s determination. Although the employer and claimant testified that claimant was laid-off due to lack of work, the board was not required to accept such testimony. Taking the record in its entirety, we conclude that the determination is supported by substantial evidence and we must affirm. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Koreman and Larkin, 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 October 16, 1974, which disqualified claimant from receiving benefits on the ground he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Where there is contradictory proof in the testimony and in claimant’s application for benefits and his summary of insurance interview, issues of fact and credibility are presented for the board’s determination. Although the employer and claimant testified that claimant was laid-off due to lack of work, the board was not required to accept such testimony. Taking the record in its entirety, we conclude that the determination is supported by substantial evidence and we must affirm. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Koreman and Larkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 626, 374 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12434, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-lagattolia-nyappdiv-1975.