In re the Claim of Bandman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Bandman

240 A.D.2d 810, 659 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6024

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 5, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 240 A.D.2d 810 (In re the Claim of Bandman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re the Claim of Bandman, 240 A.D.2d 810, 659 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6024 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 21, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that, claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant continued to work a nine-hour-a-week part-time job after his full-time employment ended under nondisqualifying circumstances. He received unemployment insurance benefits which reflected a reduced benefit rate due to his [811]*811continued, part-time employment. Claiming that the part-time job was causing stress and interfering with his ability to find full-time employment, claimant quit his part-time job. Thereafter, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualified claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he left his part-time employment without good cause and assessed him a recoverable overpayment of $975. Under the circumstances, we conclude that the Board’s finding that claimant left his employment for personal and noncompelling reasons is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Pierce [Hudacs], 210 AD2d 727; Matter of Grandy [Phillips— Ross], 64 AD2d 796) and that the recoverable overpayment was properly assessed (see, Labor Law § 597 [4]).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 21, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that, claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant continued to work a nine-hour-a-week part-time job after his full-time employment ended under nondisqualifying circumstances. He received unemployment insurance benefits which reflected a reduced benefit rate due to his [811]*811continued, part-time employment. Claiming that the part-time job was causing stress and interfering with his ability to find full-time employment, claimant quit his part-time job. Thereafter, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualified claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he left his part-time employment without good cause and assessed him a recoverable overpayment of $975. Under the circumstances, we conclude that the Board’s finding that claimant left his employment for personal and noncompelling reasons is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Pierce [Hudacs], 210 AD2d 727; Matter of Grandy [Phillips— Ross], 64 AD2d 796) and that the recoverable overpayment was properly assessed (see, Labor Law § 597 [4]).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D.2d 810, 659 N.Y.S.2d 804, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6024, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-bandman-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack