In re the Claim of Richard J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Richard J.

215 A.D.2d 859, 626 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4998

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

DecidedMay 11, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 215 A.D.2d 859 (In re the Claim of Richard J.) 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 Richard J., 215 A.D.2d 859, 626 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4998 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 28, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, an automobile painter and body repairman, was discharged from his employment when he failed to work on a car the shop manager instructed him to repair. While there was conflicting testimony as to whether an invoice had been issued for work on the subject vehicle, it was for the Board to assess the credibility of the witnesses and weigh the evidence accordingly. Inasmuch as the shop manager testified that an invoice had been issued for the work, but that claimant did not want to do it and stormed out of the office slamming the door behind him, substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision.

[860]*860Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, 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 June 28, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, an automobile painter and body repairman, was discharged from his employment when he failed to work on a car the shop manager instructed him to repair. While there was conflicting testimony as to whether an invoice had been issued for work on the subject vehicle, it was for the Board to assess the credibility of the witnesses and weigh the evidence accordingly. Inasmuch as the shop manager testified that an invoice had been issued for the work, but that claimant did not want to do it and stormed out of the office slamming the door behind him, substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision.

[860]*860Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 859, 626 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-richard-j-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack