Opinion
September 18, 1975
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 23, 1975, which disqualified claimant from receiving benefits effective September 13, 1974 because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. Claimant contends that the decision is not supported by substantial evidence and that he was denied due process. Claimant was discharged when discovered leaving the employer's premises with merchandise which he had neither paid for nor been given permission to take. Unquestionably, theft by an employee from his employer constitutes misconduct and disqualifies a claimant from receiving benefits, and the question of whether or not a theft occurred is one of fact (Matter of Fermaglich [Levine], 41 A.D.2d 70). The board rejected the claimant's explanation. There is substantial evidence to support the board's determination and, therefore, it should not be disturbed (Matter of Rubinstein [Catherwood], 33 A.D.2d 950). Claimant now raises for the first time a contention that he was denied due process in that the referee abused his discretion by not using an interpreter who was present. There was no request made for the service of the interpreter, and the record fails to demonstrate any lack of comprehension on the part of the claimant. Hence, there was no abuse of discretion or denial of due process. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P.J., Kane, Main, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.