In re the Claim of May

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of May

202 A.D.2d 873, 609 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2798

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

DecidedMarch 24, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 202 A.D.2d 873 (In re the Claim of May) 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 May, 202 A.D.2d 873, 609 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2798 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 6, 1992, which ruled that claimant was entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits.

The Board’s conclusion that claimant had compelling reasons to leave his employment and that his leaving was therefore not voluntary is supported by substantial evidence. The Board found that claimant had been accused of misappropriating the employer’s merchandise, which claimant denied. Although he was not fired, claimant was nevertheless told that he was still accused and that he would be carefully watched in the future. Claimant testified that the employer refused to investigate his claim of innocence and that he felt he could no longer perform his job under such circumstances. The employer raises issues of credibility which were resolved against it by the Board.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Casey and Weiss, 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 August 6, 1992, which ruled that claimant was entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits.

The Board’s conclusion that claimant had compelling reasons to leave his employment and that his leaving was therefore not voluntary is supported by substantial evidence. The Board found that claimant had been accused of misappropriating the employer’s merchandise, which claimant denied. Although he was not fired, claimant was nevertheless told that he was still accused and that he would be carefully watched in the future. Claimant testified that the employer refused to investigate his claim of innocence and that he felt he could no longer perform his job under such circumstances. The employer raises issues of credibility which were resolved against it by the Board.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Casey and Weiss, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D.2d 873, 609 N.Y.S.2d 444, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2798, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-may-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack