In re the Claim of White

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of White

50 A.D.2d 1019, 377 N.Y.S.2d 296, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12010

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 1019 (In re the Claim of White) 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 White, 50 A.D.2d 1019, 377 N.Y.S.2d 296, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12010 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 22, 1974, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground he voluntarily left his employment without good cause by provoking his discharge (Labor Law, § 593, subd 3). There is substantial evidence in the instant record to support the board’s factual findings even accepting, arguendo, claimant’s argument that the testimony of the supervisor should not be accepted because of his failure to have an opportunity for cross-examination (cf. Matter of Harper [Levine], 41 AD2d 975). The board’s determination must, therefore, be affirmed. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Koreman, 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 July 22, 1974, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground he voluntarily left his employment without good cause by provoking his discharge (Labor Law, § 593, subd 3). There is substantial evidence in the instant record to support the board’s factual findings even accepting, arguendo, claimant’s argument that the testimony of the supervisor should not be accepted because of his failure to have an opportunity for cross-examination (cf. Matter of Harper [Levine], 41 AD2d 975). The board’s determination must, therefore, be affirmed. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Koreman, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 1019, 377 N.Y.S.2d 296, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-white-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack