In re the Claim of Krotick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Krotick

207 A.D.2d 941, 616 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8970

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

DecidedSeptember 22, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 207 A.D.2d 941 (In re the Claim of Krotick) 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 Krotick, 207 A.D.2d 941, 616 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8970 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 5, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from her position as a production manager claiming that she was performing too many clerical tasks. Claimant also testified that her supervisor had become verbally abusive. The record establishes that claimant’s job duties changed in part due to a restructuring of the company and, while her supervisor was not sympathetic to her complaints, the record does not support a finding that he was verbally abusive. In addition, claimant testified at the hearing that the most significant event causing her to resign was the [942]*942departure of the company’s president, whom she viewed as her only friend. She further testified that, had he stayed, she would not have resigned. Under the circumstances, there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant voluntarily left her job for personal and noncompelling reasons, thus disqualifying her from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, White and Casey, 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 5, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from her position as a production manager claiming that she was performing too many clerical tasks. Claimant also testified that her supervisor had become verbally abusive. The record establishes that claimant’s job duties changed in part due to a restructuring of the company and, while her supervisor was not sympathetic to her complaints, the record does not support a finding that he was verbally abusive. In addition, claimant testified at the hearing that the most significant event causing her to resign was the [942]*942departure of the company’s president, whom she viewed as her only friend. She further testified that, had he stayed, she would not have resigned. Under the circumstances, there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant voluntarily left her job for personal and noncompelling reasons, thus disqualifying her from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, White and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 941, 616 N.Y.S.2d 675, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8970, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-krotick-nyappdiv-1994.