In re the Claim of Dolman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Dolman

165 A.D.2d 941, 561 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11272

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 165 A.D.2d 941 (In re the Claim of Dolman) 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 Dolman, 165 A.D.2d 941, 561 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11272 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment [942]*942Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 2, 1990, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant contends that he did not voluntarily leave his employment because the employer had defaulted in paying him his salary and had reneged on its promise to provide claimant with medical coverage. However, there is substantial evidence in the record to support the finding of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that the employer had remedied the defaults and that claimant was provided with medical coverage prior to his resignation. Accordingly, the determination that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause must be upheld (see, Matter of Sonners [Roberts], 133 AD2d 491).

Decision affirmed, without costs.

Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., 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 [942]*942Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 2, 1990, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant contends that he did not voluntarily leave his employment because the employer had defaulted in paying him his salary and had reneged on its promise to provide claimant with medical coverage. However, there is substantial evidence in the record to support the finding of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that the employer had remedied the defaults and that claimant was provided with medical coverage prior to his resignation. Accordingly, the determination that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause must be upheld (see, Matter of Sonners [Roberts], 133 AD2d 491).

Decision affirmed, without costs.

Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 A.D.2d 941, 561 N.Y.S.2d 105, 1990 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-dolman-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack