In re the Claim of Henderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Henderson

50 A.D.2d 702, 375 N.Y.S.2d 439, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12564

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

DecidedNovember 26, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 702 (In re the Claim of Henderson) 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 Henderson, 50 A.D.2d 702, 375 N.Y.S.2d 439, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12564 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 28, 1974, which affirmed an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because she refused an offer of employment for which she was reasonably fitted by training and experience (Labor Law, § 593, subd 2). The board could properly find on the instant record that claimant, although an actress for 20 years, was "reasonably fitted by training and experience” for employment as a bus driver (Labor Law, § 591, subd 2; § 593, subd 2; Matter of Austen [Corsi], 285 App Div 577), that she rejected the proffered employment as a bus driver because she felt it would interfere with auditions for acting jobs, and that her preference for work as an actress did not constitute good cause (e.g. Matter of Ranno [Catherwood], 21 AD2d 721; Matter of Austen [Corsi], supra). Accordingly, the board’s determination must be affirmed. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Koreman, Main and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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, 1974, which affirmed an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because she refused an offer of employment for which she was reasonably fitted by training and experience (Labor Law, § 593, subd 2). The board could properly find on the instant record that claimant, although an actress for 20 years, was "reasonably fitted by training and experience” for employment as a bus driver (Labor Law, § 591, subd 2; § 593, subd 2; Matter of Austen [Corsi], 285 App Div 577), that she rejected the proffered employment as a bus driver because she felt it would interfere with auditions for acting jobs, and that her preference for work as an actress did not constitute good cause (e.g. Matter of Ranno [Catherwood], 21 AD2d 721; Matter of Austen [Corsi], supra). Accordingly, the board’s determination must be affirmed. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Koreman, Main and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 702, 375 N.Y.S.2d 439, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-henderson-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack