Opinion
February 27, 1992
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
Upon her acquisition of claimant's bankrupt business, claimant's wife hired claimant as an estimator for the corporation. During the winter months claimant was taken off the payroll, at which time he and his wife went to Florida for three or four months. On his claim for benefits, claimant stated that these layoffs were due to lack of work and he testified that he went to Florida to look for work, which he never found. The evidence in the record also reveals that during these months there was no substantial decrease in the volume of business to warrant claimant's layoff. Under the circumstances, there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision that claimant went to Florida for reasons other than to seek employment there and that his periodic separations from employment constituted a voluntary leaving without good cause (see generally, Matter of Goggin [Ross], 79 A.D.2d 1057; Matter of Picardi [Levine], 51 A.D.2d 824; Matter of Levey [Catherwood], 33 A.D.2d 1066). At most this created a credibility question which was within the sole province of the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Baker [Hartnett], 147 A.D.2d 790, 791, appeal dismissed 74 N.Y.2d 714). These facts also support the further conclusion that claimant made willful statements to obtain benefits (see, Matter of Valvo [Ross], 57 N.Y.2d 116).
Weiss, P.J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr. and Levine, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.