In re the Claim of Dybowski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Dybowski

251 A.D.2d 874, 674 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7403

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

DecidedJune 18, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 874 (In re the Claim of Dybowski) 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 Dybowski, 251 A.D.2d 874, 674 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7403 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 24, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

[875]*875Claimant married a man who was enlisted in military service. After receiving word that she would be permitted to join her husband upon his completion of boot camp, claimant resigned from her employment as an insurance representative and moved to Texas, where her spouse was stationed. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she voluntarily left her employment due to marriage. We affirm. Claimant testified that she knew when she was engaged that her husband would be leaving the area and, further, that she intended to join him at some point after they were married. Under these circumstances, we find substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause (see, Matter of Hairston [Sweeney], 247 AD2d 747; Matter of Hanrahan [Sweeney], 238 AD2d 665; Matter of Hart [Sweeney], 228 AD2d 854). The remaining contentions advanced by claimant have been reviewed and found to be unpersuasive.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Carpinello and Graffeo, 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 24, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

[875]*875Claimant married a man who was enlisted in military service. After receiving word that she would be permitted to join her husband upon his completion of boot camp, claimant resigned from her employment as an insurance representative and moved to Texas, where her spouse was stationed. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she voluntarily left her employment due to marriage. We affirm. Claimant testified that she knew when she was engaged that her husband would be leaving the area and, further, that she intended to join him at some point after they were married. Under these circumstances, we find substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause (see, Matter of Hairston [Sweeney], 247 AD2d 747; Matter of Hanrahan [Sweeney], 238 AD2d 665; Matter of Hart [Sweeney], 228 AD2d 854). The remaining contentions advanced by claimant have been reviewed and found to be unpersuasive.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Carpinello and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 874, 674 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-dybowski-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack