In Re the Claim of Ragazzino
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs.
Both claimant and the Attorney-General suggest that the board found that claimant was discharged because he failed to answer the employer’s question as to whether he could get a doctor’s note to verify his illness. The decision mentions that fact but its finding is “We reject claimant’s contention that he was too ill to work that day. Claimant could not be reached by telephone until noon and was able to come to his employer’s premises to pick up his tools later that day.”
Though claimant…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Klein v. SobolAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Cancio v. AxelrodAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Homenick v. WardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990