In re the Claim of Chirichella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Chirichella

174 A.D.2d 950, 571 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9463

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

DecidedJune 27, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 174 A.D.2d 950 (In re the Claim of Chirichella) 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 Chirichella, 174 A.D.2d 950, 571 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9463 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 9, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

The record supports the conclusion that claimant quit her job as a retail salesperson and that she was not told by her employer that her services were no longer required. Although claimant argued that she was discharged by the employer’s daughter, this merely presented a question of fact for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Baker [Hartnett] 147 AD2d 790, appeal dismissed 74 NY2d 714). Accordingly, the decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Fontana [Levine] 53 AD2d 742).

Casey, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Levine and Crew III, 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 February 9, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

The record supports the conclusion that claimant quit her job as a retail salesperson and that she was not told by her employer that her services were no longer required. Although claimant argued that she was discharged by the employer’s daughter, this merely presented a question of fact for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Baker [Hartnett] 147 AD2d 790, appeal dismissed 74 NY2d 714). Accordingly, the decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Fontana [Levine] 53 AD2d 742).

Casey, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Levine and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 A.D.2d 950, 571 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9463, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-chirichella-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack