In re the Claim of Gabe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Gabe

205 A.D.2d 818, 615 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5874

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

DecidedJune 2, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 818 (In re the Claim of Gabe) 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 Gabe, 205 A.D.2d 818, 615 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5874 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 18, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

[819]*819Claimant was employed as a legal secretary. Her employer had informed her that continued scheduling of medical appointments during work hours could jeopardize her employment. Claimant subsequently went on vacation and never returned to work. We find substantial evidence to support the Board’s rejection of claimant’s contention, that she was compelled to move out of her apartment and could not find housing within commuting distance to her employment, and its finding that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Mercure, J. P., White, Casey, Weiss 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 Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 18, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

[819]*819Claimant was employed as a legal secretary. Her employer had informed her that continued scheduling of medical appointments during work hours could jeopardize her employment. Claimant subsequently went on vacation and never returned to work. We find substantial evidence to support the Board’s rejection of claimant’s contention, that she was compelled to move out of her apartment and could not find housing within commuting distance to her employment, and its finding that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Mercure, J. P., White, Casey, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 818, 615 N.Y.S.2d 301, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5874, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-gabe-nyappdiv-1994.