In re the Claim of Giglio

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Giglio

177 A.D.2d 775, 576 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14258

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

DecidedNovember 7, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 177 A.D.2d 775 (In re the Claim of Giglio) 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 Giglio, 177 A.D.2d 775, 576 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14258 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 9, 1991, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

While claimant contended that he worked during his lunch hour, he conceded that the employer never requested that he do so. He also admitted that he was never pressed to do more work than he had been doing even though there was a backlog. Under these circumstances the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, that the pressure to burden claimant with overwork was self-imposed and that he therefore left his employment for personal and noncompelling reasons, is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Wilensky [Catherwood], 33 AD2d 830; Matter of Klausner [Catherwood], 27 AD2d 776). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Yesawich Jr., Levine 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 April 9, 1991, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

While claimant contended that he worked during his lunch hour, he conceded that the employer never requested that he do so. He also admitted that he was never pressed to do more work than he had been doing even though there was a backlog. Under these circumstances the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, that the pressure to burden claimant with overwork was self-imposed and that he therefore left his employment for personal and noncompelling reasons, is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of Wilensky [Catherwood], 33 AD2d 830; Matter of Klausner [Catherwood], 27 AD2d 776). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Yesawich Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

177 A.D.2d 775, 576 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-giglio-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack