In re the Claim of Murtaugh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Murtaugh

283 A.D.2d 813, 724 N.Y.S.2d 373, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5179

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

DecidedMay 17, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D.2d 813 (In re the Claim of Murtaugh) 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 Murtaugh, 283 A.D.2d 813, 724 N.Y.S.2d 373, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5179 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 23, 2000, which ruled, inter alia, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

There is substantial evidence in the record to support the finding by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that there were no compelling reasons for claimant’s unemployment and that her period of unemployment was contrived by claimant and her employer, who is also her husband (see, Matter of Murtaugh [Commissioner of Labor], 278 AD2d 730; Matter of Contro [Commissioner of Labor], 270 AD2d 557; Matter of McNeil [Hudacs], 180 AD2d 994). Likewise, inasmuch as claim[814]*814ant indicated on her application for unemployment insurance benefits that she separated from her employment due to lack of work when, in fact, business necessity did not warrant her discharge, we decline to disturb the Board’s finding that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits (see, Matter of Murtaugh [Commissioner of Labor], supra; Matter of McNeil [Hudacs], supra).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Mugglin and Rose, 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 February 23, 2000, which ruled, inter alia, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

There is substantial evidence in the record to support the finding by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that there were no compelling reasons for claimant’s unemployment and that her period of unemployment was contrived by claimant and her employer, who is also her husband (see, Matter of Murtaugh [Commissioner of Labor], 278 AD2d 730; Matter of Contro [Commissioner of Labor], 270 AD2d 557; Matter of McNeil [Hudacs], 180 AD2d 994). Likewise, inasmuch as claim[814]*814ant indicated on her application for unemployment insurance benefits that she separated from her employment due to lack of work when, in fact, business necessity did not warrant her discharge, we decline to disturb the Board’s finding that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits (see, Matter of Murtaugh [Commissioner of Labor], supra; Matter of McNeil [Hudacs], supra).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 813, 724 N.Y.S.2d 373, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5179, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-murtaugh-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack