In re the Claim of Schwartz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Schwartz

51 A.D.2d 1097, 381 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11952

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 1097 (In re the Claim of Schwartz) 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 Schwartz, 51 A.D.2d 1097, 381 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11952 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 14, 1975, which reversed the decision of a referee and sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits effective October 23, 1974 because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Claimant’s testimony as to his reasons for leaving employment, being contrary to the employer’s version, presented factual issues which were within the sole province of the board. Since its determination is supported by substantial evidence, it must be affirmed (Matter of Rubinstein [Catherwood] 33 AD2d 950). Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Herlihy 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 August 14, 1975, which reversed the decision of a referee and sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits effective October 23, 1974 because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Claimant’s testimony as to his reasons for leaving employment, being contrary to the employer’s version, presented factual issues which were within the sole province of the board. Since its determination is supported by substantial evidence, it must be affirmed (Matter of Rubinstein [Catherwood] 33 AD2d 950). Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 1097, 381 N.Y.S.2d 364, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11952, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-schwartz-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack