In re the Claim of Hernandez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Hernandez

27 A.D.2d 766, 277 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4882

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 10, 1967·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Staley, Jr., J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which disqualified claimant-appellant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits effective September 16, 1965, for voluntarily leaving her employment to follow her spouse to another locality. Claimant was employed in Long Island by a garment manufacturing company as a sewing machine operator. She left her employment on September 16, 1965, in order to go to Puerto Rico with her husband. The actual move did not take place until December 8, 1965. There was no proof submitted that she moved to Puerto Rico for any medical reason, [767] but rather to maintain the family as a unit. The desire to maintain the family is not sufficient to avoid the clear intent of the statutory disqualification. (Labor Law, §§ 593, 623; Matter of Ost [Catherwood], 26 A D 2d 979.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Staley, Jr., J.

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

Staley, Jr., J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which disqualified claimant-appellant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits effective September 16, 1965, for voluntarily leaving her employment to follow her spouse to another locality. Claimant was employed in Long Island by a garment manufacturing company as a sewing machine operator. She left her employment on September 16, 1965, in order to go to Puerto Rico with her husband. The actual move did not take place until December 8, 1965. There was no proof submitted that she moved to Puerto Rico for any medical reason, [767] but rather to maintain the family as a unit. The desire to maintain the family is not sufficient to avoid the clear intent of the statutory disqualification. (Labor Law, §§ 593, 623; Matter of Ost [Catherwood], 26 A D 2d 979.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Staley, Jr., J.

In re the Claim of Hernandez, 27 A.D.2d 766, 277 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4882 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

27 A.D.2d 766 (In re the Claim of Hernandez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related