In re the Claim of Lacinski

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Lacinski

58 A.D.2d 927, 397 N.Y.S.2d 24, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13127

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 21, 1977·Published

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Ap-

peal Board, filed May 12, 1976, which held that the claimant was eligible for benefits. Claimant was an employee of Nassau County and was required by their administrative code to be "a citizen and bona fide resident and dweller of the county for at least one year” (Nassau County Administrative Code, § 13-1.0, subd [a], L 1939, chs 272, 701-709, as amd). Claimant sold her home in Nassau County and moved to Suffolk County to live with a daughter with whom claimant had previously resided in Nassau County. Claimant resigned her position with Nassau County because she no longer met the statutory requirement hereinabove set forth. Such a requirement is a reasonable condition of employment and claimant, failing to meet that condition by moving to Suffolk County, is precluded from receiving benefits (Matter of Keenan [Levine], 51 AD2d 596). Decision reversed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Mahoney, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, 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 Ap-

peal Board, filed May 12, 1976, which held that the claimant was eligible for benefits. Claimant was an employee of Nassau County and was required by their administrative code to be "a citizen and bona fide resident and dweller of the county for at least one year” (Nassau County Administrative Code, § 13-1.0, subd [a], L 1939, chs 272, 701-709, as amd). Claimant sold her home in Nassau County and moved to Suffolk County to live with a daughter with whom claimant had previously resided in Nassau County. Claimant resigned her position with Nassau County because she no longer met the statutory requirement hereinabove set forth. Such a requirement is a reasonable condition of employment and claimant, failing to meet that condition by moving to Suffolk County, is precluded from receiving benefits (Matter of Keenan [Levine], 51 AD2d 596). Decision reversed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Mahoney, Main, Larkin and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

In re the Claim of Lacinski, 58 A.D.2d 927, 397 N.Y.S.2d 24, 1977 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13127 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

58 A.D.2d 927 (In re the Claim of Lacinski) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related