From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Elewa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 2, 1998
249 A.D.2d 618 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

April 2, 1998

Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


Claimant's employment as a registered respiratory therapist was terminated because he entered false data on his time sheet and left work before the end of his shift on September 9, 1996. The record indicates that claimant had previously been apprised of the employer's suspicion that his time sheet did not accurately reflect the actual hours he worked. The initial determination of the local unemployment insurance office held that claimant was disqualified from benefits because he lost his job due to misconduct. Claimant requested a hearing after which the Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter ALJ) overruled the initial determination, crediting claimant's testimony that he left work only a few minutes before the end of his shift on the day in question. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reversed the ALJ, ruling that claimant was terminated under disqualifying conditions.

We affirm. Claimant's actions of falsifying his time sheet (see, Matter of Binenbaum [Levine], 50 A.D.2d 684) and leaving work early without permission (see, Matter of Shelton [Hudacs], 180 A.D.2d 997) were accurately characterized as disqualifying misconduct and supported by substantial evidence. To the extent that claimant provided testimony to the contrary, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Limarzi [Sweeney], 244 A.D.2d 750). "[C]redibility issues and the inferences to be drawn from the evidence are within the exclusive province of the Board * * *. This holds true, notwithstanding the fact that the Board did not view the witnesses or that the ALJ, who did, reached a different result, provided that substantial evidence supports the ultimate determination" (Matter of Padilla [Sephardic Home for Aged — Roberts], 113 A.D.2d 997, 997-998 [citation omitted]; see, Matter of Horton [Hartnett], 176 A.D.2d 1103, 1104).

Claimant's remaining contention, that he was improperly denied his right to subpoena witnesses and documentary evidence, is not supported by the record.

Mikoll, J.P., Crew III, Peters, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Elewa

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 2, 1998
249 A.D.2d 618 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Matter of Elewa

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of MOHAMED M. ELEWA, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Apr 2, 1998

Citations

249 A.D.2d 618 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
670 N.Y.S.2d 945

Citing Cases

Matter of Young

The record establishes that on January 31, 1998, claimant left work early in order to attend a play but left…

Matter of Thompson

The Board concluded that the co-worker's arms were at her side at the time claimant slapped her, and it…