In re the Claim of Fayle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Fayle

178 A.D.2d 685, 577 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15989

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

DecidedDecember 5, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 178 A.D.2d 685 (In re the Claim of Fayle) 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 Fayle, 178 A.D.2d 685, 577 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15989 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 13, 1989, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that [686]*686claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

It is not disputed that claimant quit his job because his employer stopped assigning him to work overtime. His quitting for this reason amounted to a dissatisfaction with his salary, which he would not have been justified in refusing in the first instance (see, Matter of Oxendine [Levine], 49 AD2d 784). There was work available to claimant at his basic 40-hour schedule as when hired. Under these circumstances, the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant’s leaving his job because of the decrease in earnings was voluntary and without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of White [Levine] 52 AD2d 1003).

Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Crew III 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 June 13, 1989, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that [686]*686claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

It is not disputed that claimant quit his job because his employer stopped assigning him to work overtime. His quitting for this reason amounted to a dissatisfaction with his salary, which he would not have been justified in refusing in the first instance (see, Matter of Oxendine [Levine], 49 AD2d 784). There was work available to claimant at his basic 40-hour schedule as when hired. Under these circumstances, the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant’s leaving his job because of the decrease in earnings was voluntary and without good cause is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of White [Levine] 52 AD2d 1003).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

178 A.D.2d 685, 577 N.Y.S.2d 158, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-fayle-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack