In re the Claim of Poest

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Poest

26 A.D.2d 863, 273 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3365

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

DecidedOctober 20, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 863 (In re the Claim of Poest) 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 Poest, 26 A.D.2d 863, 273 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3365 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. In the testimony of claimant’s supervisor and, indeed, in the testimony of claimant himself, the board found evidence, which we cannot appraise as less than substantial, that “ claimant left his job because of his inability to get along with his supervisor due to a clash of personalities.” Under the familiar rule, this court is without authority to set aside a determination of an administrative agency so grounded. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Aulisi, JJ., concur; Taylor, J., not voting.

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

Per Curiam.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. In the testimony of claimant’s supervisor and, indeed, in the testimony of claimant himself, the board found evidence, which we cannot appraise as less than substantial, that “ claimant left his job because of his inability to get along with his supervisor due to a clash of personalities.” Under the familiar rule, this court is without authority to set aside a determination of an administrative agency so grounded. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Aulisi, JJ., concur; Taylor, J., not voting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 863, 273 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3365, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-poest-nyappdiv-1966.