In re the Claim of Leverich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Leverich

52 A.D.2d 992

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

DecidedMay 20, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.2d 992 (In re the Claim of Leverich) 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 Leverich, 52 A.D.2d 992 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 29, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Although claimant contends that he did not quit, there is substantial evidence in this record to support the board’s determination that he voluntarily left his employment. The record indicates that the claimant had repeatedly indicated dissatisfaction with his employment and clearly gave notice of leaving on December 20, 1974. Claimant opened his own beauty shop on January 1, 1975. The resolution of the factual dispute as to the cause of claimant’s separation from employment is a determination within the sole province of the board, if supported by evidence (Matter of Williams [Levine], 50 AD2d 975; Matter of Kansky [Catherwood], 27 AD2d 887). Decision affirmed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Mahoney, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, 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 April 29, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Although claimant contends that he did not quit, there is substantial evidence in this record to support the board’s determination that he voluntarily left his employment. The record indicates that the claimant had repeatedly indicated dissatisfaction with his employment and clearly gave notice of leaving on December 20, 1974. Claimant opened his own beauty shop on January 1, 1975. The resolution of the factual dispute as to the cause of claimant’s separation from employment is a determination within the sole province of the board, if supported by evidence (Matter of Williams [Levine], 50 AD2d 975; Matter of Kansky [Catherwood], 27 AD2d 887). Decision affirmed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Mahoney, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 992, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-leverich-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack