In re the Claim of Lu

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Lu

253 A.D.2d 938, 677 N.Y.S.2d 408, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9383

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

DecidedSeptember 10, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 253 A.D.2d 938 (In re the Claim of Lu) 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 Lu, 253 A.D.2d 938, 677 N.Y.S.2d 408, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9383 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 21, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Following a leave of absence to attend school, claimant returned to her employment as a custodian for the employer on May 15, 1995 until school resumed on September 1, 1995. According to the employer, continuing work was available to claimant at the time she left. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits inasmuch as leaving employment to attend school constitutes a voluntary [939]*939leaving without good cause (see, Matter of Rulka [Commissioner of Labor], 249 AD2d 876; Matter of Feinberg [Hudacs], 211 AD2d 934). While claimant disagreed with the employer’s version of events surrounding her departure, this created a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Rulka [Commissioner of Labor], supra).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Peters, Spain and Graffeo, 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 21, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Following a leave of absence to attend school, claimant returned to her employment as a custodian for the employer on May 15, 1995 until school resumed on September 1, 1995. According to the employer, continuing work was available to claimant at the time she left. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits inasmuch as leaving employment to attend school constitutes a voluntary [939]*939leaving without good cause (see, Matter of Rulka [Commissioner of Labor], 249 AD2d 876; Matter of Feinberg [Hudacs], 211 AD2d 934). While claimant disagreed with the employer’s version of events surrounding her departure, this created a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Rulka [Commissioner of Labor], supra).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Peters, Spain and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 938, 677 N.Y.S.2d 408, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9383, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-lu-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack