Opinion
November 5, 1992
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
As the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board noted, claimant and his alleged employer changed their stories concerning the circumstances surrounding claimant's employment. It also pointed out that their explanations were in conflict with each other. They disagreed on the nature of the work, the rate of pay and the reasons why claimant stopped working. It was within the Board's province to assess matters of credibility and the inferences to be drawn from the evidence presented (see, Matter of Di Maria v Ross, 52 N.Y.2d 771). On the record before us, the Board's conclusion that claimant's employment was not bona fide and that claimant continued to be disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, supra; Matter of Ruperto [Roberts], 89 A.D.2d 1039). There is also substantial evidence in the record to support the Board's conclusion that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits (see, Matter of Goggin [Ross], 79 A.D.2d 1057).
Yesawich Jr., J.P., Levine, Crew III, Casey and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.