In re the Claim of Rosado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Rosado

49 A.D.2d 782, 372 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10808

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

DecidedSeptember 18, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 A.D.2d 782 (In re the Claim of Rosado) 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 Rosado, 49 A.D.2d 782, 372 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10808 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 8, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying the claimant from receiving benefits effective September 11, 1974 because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. The board found on substantial evidence in this record that the claimant was discharged because he refused to do work. The record does not sustain claimant’s contention that the lack of an interpreter deprived him of due process. Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Sweeney, Kane, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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 January 8, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying the claimant from receiving benefits effective September 11, 1974 because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. The board found on substantial evidence in this record that the claimant was discharged because he refused to do work. The record does not sustain claimant’s contention that the lack of an interpreter deprived him of due process. Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Sweeney, Kane, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 782, 372 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10808, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-rosado-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack