Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: the Claim of Ralph B. MAGLIARO, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 26, 1997, which, inter alia, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.
Claimant challenges the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's ruling that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause and that he willfully made false statements to obtain benefits. Claimant was employed as a truck driver in this State until he relocated to Texas and filed an interstate claim for benefits. While he was receiving benefits, he submitted coupons by mail certifying that he was totally unemployed despite the fact that he was initially employed as a retail store clerk and later worked as a truck driver for a concrete company. Inasmuch as there is no acceptable excuse for falsely certifying unemployment, the Board's finding that claimant willfully made false statements to obtain benefits is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Le Pore [Sweeney], 248 A.D.2d 783, 669 N.Y.S.2d 691; Matter of Silverstein [Sweeney], 236 A.D.2d 757, 654 N.Y.S.2d 203). Finally, claimant's resignations from the retail store and the concrete company to pursue a personal business venture provided substantial evidence for the Board's finding that he left his employment without good cause (see, Matter of Kruger [Sweeney], 222 A.D.2d 920, 635 N.Y.S.2d 302; Matter of Valdez [Hudacs], 192 A.D.2d 816, 596 N.Y.S.2d 501). We note that claimant's proffered explanations for his resignations presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Rulka [Commissioner of Labor], 249 A.D.2d 876, 672 N.Y.S.2d 450). We have reviewed claimant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: July 09, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)