In re the Claim of Chimento

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Chimento

172 A.D.2d 944, 568 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4573

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

DecidedApril 11, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 944 (In re the Claim of Chimento) 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 Chimento, 172 A.D.2d 944, 568 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4573 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 2, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

The record reveals that claimant left her job as a chiropractic assistant because there was too much responsibility which caused her stress. First, we note that claimant’s weekend work schedule was entirely up to her and, therefore, she did not have to work seven days to complete her job duties. In addition, while claimant alleged that there were work-related stress problems, she received no medical advice to leave the job. Consequently, the decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Chaw kin [Catherwood], 18 AD2d 750).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Mikoll, Crew III 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 May 2, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

The record reveals that claimant left her job as a chiropractic assistant because there was too much responsibility which caused her stress. First, we note that claimant’s weekend work schedule was entirely up to her and, therefore, she did not have to work seven days to complete her job duties. In addition, while claimant alleged that there were work-related stress problems, she received no medical advice to leave the job. Consequently, the decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Chaw kin [Catherwood], 18 AD2d 750).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Mikoll, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 944, 568 N.Y.S.2d 224, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-chimento-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack