In re the Claim of Incorvaia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Incorvaia

50 A.D.2d 684, 375 N.Y.S.2d 414, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12526

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 20, 1975·Published

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 14, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground she voluntarily left her employment without good cause (Labor Law, § 593, subd 1, par [a]). Claimant, a clerk for an insurance company, and her husband decided to give up their large home in Lynbrook, where the employer’s office at which claimant worked was located, and move to a smaller condominium in Amityville. After moving to Amityville claimant decided that the daily trip to Lynbrook was too far and resigned her employment. The board found that claimant had chosen to make her employment inaccessible for personal noncompelling reasons and, therefore, voluntarily left employment without good cause. This determination is [685] supported by substantial evidence in the instant record and must, accordingly, be affirmed (see Matter of Frankel [Catherwood], 26 AD2d 866). Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Koreman, Main, Larkin 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 May 14, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground she voluntarily left her employment without good cause (Labor Law, § 593, subd 1, par [a]). Claimant, a clerk for an insurance company, and her husband decided to give up their large home in Lynbrook, where the employer’s office at which claimant worked was located, and move to a smaller condominium in Amityville. After moving to Amityville claimant decided that the daily trip to Lynbrook was too far and resigned her employment. The board found that claimant had chosen to make her employment inaccessible for personal noncompelling reasons and, therefore, voluntarily left employment without good cause. This determination is [685] supported by substantial evidence in the instant record and must, accordingly, be affirmed (see Matter of Frankel [Catherwood], 26 AD2d 866). Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Koreman, Main, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

In re the Claim of Incorvaia, 50 A.D.2d 684, 375 N.Y.S.2d 414, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12526 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

50 A.D.2d 684 (In re the Claim of Incorvaia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related