In re the Claim of Starich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Starich

52 A.D.2d 965, 382 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12835

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

DecidedMay 6, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.2d 965 (In re the Claim of Starich) 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 Starich, 52 A.D.2d 965, 382 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12835 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 5, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits effective November 20, 1974 because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. On claimant’s application for employment, he indicated he was a high school graduate. Subsequent investigation by his employer revealed that he had not completed high school. Claimant’s contentions in support of his claim were rejected by the board and there is substantial evidence to support its determination of misconduct (Matter of Collazo [Levine] 51 AD2d 603; Matter of Gunther [Levine] 47 AD2d 811). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane 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 June 5, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits effective November 20, 1974 because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. On claimant’s application for employment, he indicated he was a high school graduate. Subsequent investigation by his employer revealed that he had not completed high school. Claimant’s contentions in support of his claim were rejected by the board and there is substantial evidence to support its determination of misconduct (Matter of Collazo [Levine] 51 AD2d 603; Matter of Gunther [Levine] 47 AD2d 811). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 965, 382 N.Y.S.2d 858, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-starich-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack