In re the Claim of Martino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Martino

24 A.D.2d 772, 263 N.Y.S.2d 745, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3190

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 24 A.D.2d 772 (In re the Claim of Martino) 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 Martino, 24 A.D.2d 772, 263 N.Y.S.2d 745, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3190 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Hamm, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that the claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause by provoking his discharge (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1). The plaintiff was discharged after prior [773]*773Warning for violation of what the board termed “ a reasonable rule ”. When the claimant refused to meet a condition of his work, he became separated from his employment by his own volition and it was within the fact-finding power of the board to determine that the separation was voluntary (Matter of Karman [Lubin], 2 A D 2d 626). What constitutes good cause within subdivision 1 of section 593 of the Labor Law regarding disqualification for unemployment compensation in cases of voluntary separation is also a question of fact (Matter of Sperling [Catherwood], 20 A D 2d 584) and the resolution of the factual issues is within the power of the board if supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Weinberger [Catherwood], 22 A D 2d 995). On the present record we may not disturb the board’s determination (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Griffin [Catherwood], 23 A D 2d 902). Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

Hamm, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that the claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause by provoking his discharge (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1). The plaintiff was discharged after prior [773]*773Warning for violation of what the board termed “ a reasonable rule ”. When the claimant refused to meet a condition of his work, he became separated from his employment by his own volition and it was within the fact-finding power of the board to determine that the separation was voluntary (Matter of Karman [Lubin], 2 A D 2d 626). What constitutes good cause within subdivision 1 of section 593 of the Labor Law regarding disqualification for unemployment compensation in cases of voluntary separation is also a question of fact (Matter of Sperling [Catherwood], 20 A D 2d 584) and the resolution of the factual issues is within the power of the board if supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Weinberger [Catherwood], 22 A D 2d 995). On the present record we may not disturb the board’s determination (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Griffin [Catherwood], 23 A D 2d 902). Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 772, 263 N.Y.S.2d 745, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-martino-nyappdiv-1965.