In re the Claim of Carrasco

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Carrasco

271 A.D.2d 788, 706 N.Y.S.2d 491, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4189

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

DecidedApril 13, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 271 A.D.2d 788 (In re the Claim of Carrasco) 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 Carrasco, 271 A.D.2d 788, 706 N.Y.S.2d 491, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4189 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 4, 1999, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant was employed as a dietary aide until October 14, 1998, when he was ordered to leave his employment until he received treatment from an outside psychiatrist. Thereafter, while claimant met with a psychiatrist he failed to notify his employer regarding his treatment and never reported back to work. The employer subsequently informed claimant that he was discharged from his employment for failing to follow the employer’s instructions or for failing to contact the employer regarding his continued absence.

In our view, substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision ruling that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause. “When a claimant fails to take a step that is reasonably required as a prerequisite to continued employment, the claimant will be [789]*789deemed to have left his employment without good cause” (Matter of Bonilla [Sweeney], 233 AD2d 735, 735-736; see, Matter of Joyce [Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 901). Here, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits.

Peters, J. P., Spain, Carpinello, Graffeo and Mugglin, 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 June 4, 1999, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant was employed as a dietary aide until October 14, 1998, when he was ordered to leave his employment until he received treatment from an outside psychiatrist. Thereafter, while claimant met with a psychiatrist he failed to notify his employer regarding his treatment and never reported back to work. The employer subsequently informed claimant that he was discharged from his employment for failing to follow the employer’s instructions or for failing to contact the employer regarding his continued absence.

In our view, substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision ruling that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause. “When a claimant fails to take a step that is reasonably required as a prerequisite to continued employment, the claimant will be [789]*789deemed to have left his employment without good cause” (Matter of Bonilla [Sweeney], 233 AD2d 735, 735-736; see, Matter of Joyce [Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 901). Here, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits.

Peters, J. P., Spain, Carpinello, Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 788, 706 N.Y.S.2d 491, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-carrasco-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack