In re the Claim of Gibbs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Gibbs

273 A.D.2d 672, 711 N.Y.S.2d 358, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7202

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

DecidedJune 22, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 273 A.D.2d 672 (In re the Claim of Gibbs) 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 Gibbs, 273 A.D.2d 672, 711 N.Y.S.2d 358, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7202 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 29, 1999, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she refused an offer of suitable employment without good cause.

“Whether a claimant had good cause to refuse an offer of suitable employment is a question for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board and its decision, if supported by substantial evidence, must be upheld” (Matter of Palmer [Commissioner of Labor], 265 AD2d 787). Here, claimant, a home health care aide, applied for unemployment insurance benefits due to lack of work. Thereafter, the employer offered claimant a position as a home health aide which claimant declined on the ground that it involved too many hours. The employer again contacted claimant regarding another position which claimant refused because she would have to take two trains. Inasmuch as substantial evidence supports the decision of the Board that claimant refused an offer of suitable employment without good cause, it will not be disturbed (see, Matter of Livingston [Commissioner of Labor], 268 AD2d 665). Claimant’s remaining arguments have been examined and found to be unpersuasive.

[673]*673Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Peters, Rose and Lahtinen, 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 decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 29, 1999, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she refused an offer of suitable employment without good cause.

“Whether a claimant had good cause to refuse an offer of suitable employment is a question for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board and its decision, if supported by substantial evidence, must be upheld” (Matter of Palmer [Commissioner of Labor], 265 AD2d 787). Here, claimant, a home health care aide, applied for unemployment insurance benefits due to lack of work. Thereafter, the employer offered claimant a position as a home health aide which claimant declined on the ground that it involved too many hours. The employer again contacted claimant regarding another position which claimant refused because she would have to take two trains. Inasmuch as substantial evidence supports the decision of the Board that claimant refused an offer of suitable employment without good cause, it will not be disturbed (see, Matter of Livingston [Commissioner of Labor], 268 AD2d 665). Claimant’s remaining arguments have been examined and found to be unpersuasive.

[673]*673Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Peters, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D.2d 672, 711 N.Y.S.2d 358, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-gibbs-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack