MATTER OF CLAIM OF ESTEVEZ

Claimant was employed as a painter for a furniture factory when he resigned in November 1998 after informing the employer that he needed to return to his home in the Dominican Republic to take care of personal business. According to the employer, claimant did not ask for or obtain a leave of absence. When claimant returned to the United States and contacted the employer in January 1999, he was informed that his former position was no longer available. Under the circumstances, we find that substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant left his employment for personal and noncompelling reasons, thus, disqualifying him from receipt of unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Morales [Commissioner of Labor], 261 A.D.2d 685; Matter of Polax [New York City Dept. of Correction — Sweeney], 220 A.D.2d 919). Notably, while claimant's version of the events surrounding his separation from employment differed from that of the employer, this raised an issue of credibility for resolution by the Board (see, Matter of Boyle [Sweeney], 247 A.D.2d 809). Finally, the record supports the ruling that claimant was properly charged with a recoverable overpayment of benefits (Matter of Kaufman [Commissioner of Labor], ___ A.D.2d ___, 703 N.Y.S.2d 586).

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Carpinello, Graffeo and Lahtinen, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.