In re the Claim of Gillette

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Gillette

264 A.D.2d 877, 694 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9026

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

DecidedSeptember 9, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 264 A.D.2d 877 (In re the Claim of Gillette) 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 Gillette, 264 A.D.2d 877, 694 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9026 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 3, 1998, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant, an assembler, voluntarily left his employment with a temporary agency because he anticipated being rehired by a former employer after he had been notified that a final interview had been scheduled in connection with his application for rehire. Claimant failed to report to work thereafter or contact his current employer regarding his intention not to return to his work assignment. Ultimately, claimant was not rehired by the former employer. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant did not have a firm offer of new employment and voluntarily left his existing employment for personal and noncompelling reasons (see, Matter of Spinelli [Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 920, 921; Matter of Wallenhorst [Edwards Elec. — Hudacs], 209 AD2d 809). Any conflicting testimony presented at the hearing merely created a credibility issue for resolution for the Board (see, Matter of Wallenhorst [Edwards Elec. — Hudacs], supra).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Carpinello, Graffeo and Mugglin, 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 3, 1998, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant, an assembler, voluntarily left his employment with a temporary agency because he anticipated being rehired by a former employer after he had been notified that a final interview had been scheduled in connection with his application for rehire. Claimant failed to report to work thereafter or contact his current employer regarding his intention not to return to his work assignment. Ultimately, claimant was not rehired by the former employer. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant did not have a firm offer of new employment and voluntarily left his existing employment for personal and noncompelling reasons (see, Matter of Spinelli [Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 920, 921; Matter of Wallenhorst [Edwards Elec. — Hudacs], 209 AD2d 809). Any conflicting testimony presented at the hearing merely created a credibility issue for resolution for the Board (see, Matter of Wallenhorst [Edwards Elec. — Hudacs], supra).

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Carpinello, Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 877, 694 N.Y.S.2d 532, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9026, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-gillette-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack