In re the Claim of Black

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Black

168 A.D.2d 728, 563 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14801

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

DecidedDecember 6, 1990

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 168 A.D.2d 728 (In re the Claim of Black) 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 Black, 168 A.D.2d 728, 563 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14801 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 26, 1989, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Contrary to claimant’s contention on appeal, the evidence in the record, including claimant’s resignation letter and her claim for unemployment insurance benefits, supports the conclusion that claimant was rehired after being fired twice and then left voluntarily. However, dissatisfaction with one’s boss, not agreeing with him or not getting along with him do not constitute good cause for leaving one’s employment (see, Matter of Grossman [Levine] 51 AD2d 853; Matter of Snapperman [Levine] 50 AD2d 1029). Claimant admitted that her reason for resigning was because she did not like her executive director’s management style and she disagreed with his firing [729]*729of her supervisor. Under the circumstances, the determination disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Serrano [Levine], 52 AD2d 1022). Finally, claimant was given ample opportunity to question all witnesses.

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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 26, 1989, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Contrary to claimant’s contention on appeal, the evidence in the record, including claimant’s resignation letter and her claim for unemployment insurance benefits, supports the conclusion that claimant was rehired after being fired twice and then left voluntarily. However, dissatisfaction with one’s boss, not agreeing with him or not getting along with him do not constitute good cause for leaving one’s employment (see, Matter of Grossman [Levine] 51 AD2d 853; Matter of Snapperman [Levine] 50 AD2d 1029). Claimant admitted that her reason for resigning was because she did not like her executive director’s management style and she disagreed with his firing [729]*729of her supervisor. Under the circumstances, the determination disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Serrano [Levine], 52 AD2d 1022). Finally, claimant was given ample opportunity to question all witnesses.

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 A.D.2d 728, 563 N.Y.S.2d 575, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-black-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack