In re the Claim of Terry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Terry

51 A.D.2d 1096, 381 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11948

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 1096 (In re the Claim of Terry) 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 Terry, 51 A.D.2d 1096, 381 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11948 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 8, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he lost his employment as a result of his own misconduct. Claimant’s employment was terminated for insubordination after repeated warnings for violation of company rules. The board has determined that claimant’s activities rise to the level of misconduct as contemplated in Matter of James (Levine) (34 NY2d 491). This finding is supported by substantial evidence and, since the issue is a factual determination made by the board, it must be affirmed (Matter of Lester [Catherwood], 30 AD2d 1025). 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 April 8, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he lost his employment as a result of his own misconduct. Claimant’s employment was terminated for insubordination after repeated warnings for violation of company rules. The board has determined that claimant’s activities rise to the level of misconduct as contemplated in Matter of James (Levine) (34 NY2d 491). This finding is supported by substantial evidence and, since the issue is a factual determination made by the board, it must be affirmed (Matter of Lester [Catherwood], 30 AD2d 1025). 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 1096, 381 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11948, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-terry-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack