In re the Claim of Cornacchia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Cornacchia

178 A.D.2d 742, 577 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16001

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

DecidedDecember 5, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 178 A.D.2d 742 (In re the Claim of Cornacchia) 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 Cornacchia, 178 A.D.2d 742, 577 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16001 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 3, 1990, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

In submitting her letter of resignation, claimant gave as her main reason for leaving the fact that her uncle had been hired to do repair work and that she considered his presence a hazard to her health. She conceded, however, that on the one occasion that he was at work he left her alone and that she would never have to work alone with him. Furthermore, while claimant also said she was leaving due to a lack of health coverage, she admitted that had her uncle not been hired she would have continued to work for at least two more months without such coverage. Under these circumstances, the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant left for personal and noncompelling reasons is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Logan [Levine], 52 AD2d 679, lv denied 39 NY2d 709). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, 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 December 3, 1990, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

In submitting her letter of resignation, claimant gave as her main reason for leaving the fact that her uncle had been hired to do repair work and that she considered his presence a hazard to her health. She conceded, however, that on the one occasion that he was at work he left her alone and that she would never have to work alone with him. Furthermore, while claimant also said she was leaving due to a lack of health coverage, she admitted that had her uncle not been hired she would have continued to work for at least two more months without such coverage. Under these circumstances, the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant left for personal and noncompelling reasons is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Logan [Levine], 52 AD2d 679, lv denied 39 NY2d 709). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 A.D.2d 742, 577 N.Y.S.2d 179, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-cornacchia-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack