In re the Claim of Marton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Marton

173 A.D.2d 1045, 570 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7572

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

DecidedMay 16, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 173 A.D.2d 1045 (In re the Claim of Marton) 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 Marton, 173 A.D.2d 1045, 570 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7572 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 11, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

At the hearing, testimony was taken from claimant’s employer who stated that she received two complaints of inappro[1046]*1046priate behavior toward two women by claimant. Both of the women, involved also testified that claimant had inappropriately touched them. Although claimant denied any involvement, this merely presented a question of credibility which was within the exclusive province of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Padilla [Sephardic Home for the Aged—Roberts], 113 AD2d 997). Here, there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Board’s decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to misconduct (see, Matter of Valentin [American Museum of Natural History—Roberts] 103 AD2d 919).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Weiss, J. P., Yesawich, Jr., Levine, Mercure and Harvey, 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 June 11, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

At the hearing, testimony was taken from claimant’s employer who stated that she received two complaints of inappro[1046]*1046priate behavior toward two women by claimant. Both of the women, involved also testified that claimant had inappropriately touched them. Although claimant denied any involvement, this merely presented a question of credibility which was within the exclusive province of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Padilla [Sephardic Home for the Aged—Roberts], 113 AD2d 997). Here, there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Board’s decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to misconduct (see, Matter of Valentin [American Museum of Natural History—Roberts] 103 AD2d 919).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Weiss, J. P., Yesawich, Jr., Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 A.D.2d 1045, 570 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-marton-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack