In re the Claim of Izquierdo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Izquierdo

238 A.D.2d 654, 655 N.Y.S.2d 682, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3126

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

DecidedApril 3, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 238 A.D.2d 654 (In re the Claim of Izquierdo) 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 Izquierdo, 238 A.D.2d 654, 655 N.Y.S.2d 682, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3126 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 21, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant worked as a secretary for the employer attorney. On February 18, 1994, she was given a written notice of termination stating that her last day of employment would be March 31, 1994. Claimant left her employment for good on the day she received the notice of termination. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently ruled that claimant had left her employment under disqualifying circumstances. We affirm. An employee who abandons employment in anticipation of discharge will be found to have voluntarily left his or her employment without good cause (see, Matter of Robertson [Hudacs], 206 AD2d 563). Claimant testified that she left her employment on the day she received the notice of termination because her supervisor directed her to do so, notwithstanding the provision in the notice that her employment would continue for the following seven weeks. The employer’s contrary testimony regarding the termination of claimant’s employment raised an issue of credibility which lay within the province of the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Dreschsler [Bretton Woods Homeowners Assn.—Hudacs], 197 AD2d 739).

[655]*655Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and Carpinello, 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 December 21, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant worked as a secretary for the employer attorney. On February 18, 1994, she was given a written notice of termination stating that her last day of employment would be March 31, 1994. Claimant left her employment for good on the day she received the notice of termination. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently ruled that claimant had left her employment under disqualifying circumstances. We affirm. An employee who abandons employment in anticipation of discharge will be found to have voluntarily left his or her employment without good cause (see, Matter of Robertson [Hudacs], 206 AD2d 563). Claimant testified that she left her employment on the day she received the notice of termination because her supervisor directed her to do so, notwithstanding the provision in the notice that her employment would continue for the following seven weeks. The employer’s contrary testimony regarding the termination of claimant’s employment raised an issue of credibility which lay within the province of the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Dreschsler [Bretton Woods Homeowners Assn.—Hudacs], 197 AD2d 739).

[655]*655Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 654, 655 N.Y.S.2d 682, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-izquierdo-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack