In re the Claim of Gilmore

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Gilmore

25 A.D.2d 462, 266 N.Y.S.2d 174, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5178

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 25 A.D.2d 462 (In re the Claim of Gilmore) 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 Gilmore, 25 A.D.2d 462, 266 N.Y.S.2d 174, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5178 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits and ruling that claimant had been overpaid $500, which overpayment was deemed nonrecoverable. The sole question presented on this appeal is the validity of the board’s finding that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1). What constitutes “good cause” is factual and thus within the exclusive province of the board if its determination is supported by substantial evidence (Labor Law, § 623; e.g., Matter of Sperling [Catherwood], 20 A D 2d 584). On the present record the board could properly find that claimant left his employment because he believed he would be laid off in the near future due to the status of the employer’s business and that his voluntary separation from employment based on this belief was not premised on good cause; as, indeed, was subsequently demonstrated. Decision affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Reynolds, J.

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits and ruling that claimant had been overpaid $500, which overpayment was deemed nonrecoverable. The sole question presented on this appeal is the validity of the board’s finding that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1). What constitutes “good cause” is factual and thus within the exclusive province of the board if its determination is supported by substantial evidence (Labor Law, § 623; e.g., Matter of Sperling [Catherwood], 20 A D 2d 584). On the present record the board could properly find that claimant left his employment because he believed he would be laid off in the near future due to the status of the employer’s business and that his voluntary separation from employment based on this belief was not premised on good cause; as, indeed, was subsequently demonstrated. Decision affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Aulisi and Hamm, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 462, 266 N.Y.S.2d 174, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-gilmore-nyappdiv-1966.