In re the Claim of Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Goldstein

202 A.D.2d 940, 609 N.Y.S.2d 459, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3060

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 31, 1994·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 28, 1992, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

In response to claimant’s allegations regarding one of her employer’s associates, the employer took various steps to alleviate her concerns, including rearranging the parties’ schedules so that they would have minimum contact with one another. Despite these efforts, and without any further discussions with her employer, claimant quit her job claiming that the work environment was unsuitable. Upon our review of the record, we find substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion that claimant left her job for personal and noncompelling reasons and, therefore, without good cause.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, 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 October 28, 1992, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

In response to claimant’s allegations regarding one of her employer’s associates, the employer took various steps to alleviate her concerns, including rearranging the parties’ schedules so that they would have minimum contact with one another. Despite these efforts, and without any further discussions with her employer, claimant quit her job claiming that the work environment was unsuitable. Upon our review of the record, we find substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion that claimant left her job for personal and noncompelling reasons and, therefore, without good cause.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Casey, Weiss and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of Goldstein, 202 A.D.2d 940, 609 N.Y.S.2d 459, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3060 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

202 A.D.2d 940 (In re the Claim of Goldstein) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related