Opinion ID: 2365217
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Substantial Record Evidence

Text: The claimants testified that they had, in previous years, tried to keep their beach restaurant open year-round, but had operated at a financial loss during the winter months. The claimants testified and provided bank statements showing that in previous winters they had to transfer their personal money into the business accounts to meet expenses. The claimants testified about the general lack of business at beach restaurants during the winter season. The Board accepted and relied upon this evidence in support of its decision. In these proceedings, the Department has consistently argued that claimants engaged in a bad faith, considered plan to obtain a subsidy from the state in the form of unemployment insurance benefits. Nevertheless, the Appeals Referee concluded that the claimants had good cause to close the business during the winter to avoid financial losses to their business and to enable it to remain profitable. The Board, as the ultimate fact-finder also rejected the Department's argument, finding the claimants' testimony and evidence to be credible that the temporary closing of the business was impelled by economic factors, explicitly finding that claimants acted in good faith. [14] The Superior Court concluded that the claimants' respective states of unemployment [were] matters over which the claimants had control and result[ed] from a deliberate decision to tailor the terms of employment, and particularly, compensation, in such a way as to avail themselves of unemployment compensation benefits. [15] The claimants' intentions or motives rest on a determination of their credibility. These issues were resolved in the claimants' favor by the Board, as the finder of fact. Questions of credibility are exclusively within the province of the Board which heard the evidence. As an appellate court, it was not within the province of the Superior Court to weigh the evidence, determine questions of credibility or make its own factual findings. The Board found that the claimants made a sound business decision to close their business for the winter due to financial unprofitability and, as such, left work for good cause attributable to the work. The Board's findings that claimants acted in good faith and were motivated by adverse economic factors beyond their control are supported by substantial competent evidence. Accordingly, the Board properly decided that the claimants were entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits.