In re the Claim of O'Leary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of O'Leary

21 A.D.2d 722, 250 N.Y.S.2d 251, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3661

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

DecidedMay 27, 1964

StatusPublished

This text of 21 A.D.2d 722 (In re the Claim of O'Leary) 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 O'Leary, 21 A.D.2d 722, 250 N.Y.S.2d 251, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3661 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

This is an appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirming the decision of a Referee which sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner. There is substantial evidence contained in the record, including the claimant’s own statements, to support the factual finding made by the board that the claimant lost his employment through misconduct (Matter of Baida [Catherwood], 18 A D 2d 945 [false and premature entries on time cards]). In his brief the claimant alleges discrimination because of his religious belief and of Ms espousal of unionization. But these contentions were not raised before the Commissioner, the Referee or the board and no proof was offered to support them. As we find the board’s conclusion was supported by substantial evidence we are required to accept it as final and conclusive (Unemployment Insurance Law [Labor Law, art. 18], § 623; Matter of Morton, 284 N. Y. 167, 170; Matter of Ianni [CatherwoodI], 14 A D 2d 469). Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

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

This is an appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirming the decision of a Referee which sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner. There is substantial evidence contained in the record, including the claimant’s own statements, to support the factual finding made by the board that the claimant lost his employment through misconduct (Matter of Baida [Catherwood], 18 A D 2d 945 [false and premature entries on time cards]). In his brief the claimant alleges discrimination because of his religious belief and of Ms espousal of unionization. But these contentions were not raised before the Commissioner, the Referee or the board and no proof was offered to support them. As we find the board’s conclusion was supported by substantial evidence we are required to accept it as final and conclusive (Unemployment Insurance Law [Labor Law, art. 18], § 623; Matter of Morton, 284 N. Y. 167, 170; Matter of Ianni [CatherwoodI], 14 A D 2d 469). Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Taylor, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.2d 722, 250 N.Y.S.2d 251, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-oleary-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack