In re the Claim of Constantino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Constantino

215 A.D.2d 860, 626 N.Y.S.2d 326, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4997

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

DecidedMay 11, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 215 A.D.2d 860 (In re the Claim of Constantino) 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 Constantino, 215 A.D.2d 860, 626 N.Y.S.2d 326, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4997 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the [861]*861Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 25, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Upon review of the record, we find that there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant voluntarily left his position as a press operator without good cause. Claimant was upset when his employer changed the hours of his shift and, as a result, quit his job. While claimant asserts that he had to leave his employment because the shift change made it impossible for him to take care of his disabled brother, there was evidence that claimant failed to make mention of family responsibilities at the time he quit and that there were other family members who could provide assistance. Accordingly, the Board’s decision must be upheld.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, 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 [861]*861Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 25, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Upon review of the record, we find that there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant voluntarily left his position as a press operator without good cause. Claimant was upset when his employer changed the hours of his shift and, as a result, quit his job. While claimant asserts that he had to leave his employment because the shift change made it impossible for him to take care of his disabled brother, there was evidence that claimant failed to make mention of family responsibilities at the time he quit and that there were other family members who could provide assistance. Accordingly, the Board’s decision must be upheld.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D.2d 860, 626 N.Y.S.2d 326, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4997, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-constantino-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack