In re the Claim of Mayhew

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Mayhew

217 A.D.2d 734, 628 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7618

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

DecidedJuly 6, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 217 A.D.2d 734 (In re the Claim of Mayhew) 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 Mayhew, 217 A.D.2d 734, 628 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7618 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 5, 1994, 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.

On its own motion, the Board reopened claimant’s case for the purpose of determining if there had been compliance with the procedural safeguards set forth in Municipal Labor Comm. v Sitkin (79 Civ 5899, 1983 WL 44294). Upon finding no procedural violations, the Board adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Although claimant has not raised any procedural claims on appeal but rather argues the merits of the Board’s prior decision, we nonetheless concur with the Board that there are no procedural violations. Furthermore, inasmuch as the Board did not address the merits of claimant’s case upon reconsideration, we decline to do the same here.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, 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 January 5, 1994, 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.

On its own motion, the Board reopened claimant’s case for the purpose of determining if there had been compliance with the procedural safeguards set forth in Municipal Labor Comm. v Sitkin (79 Civ 5899, 1983 WL 44294). Upon finding no procedural violations, the Board adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Although claimant has not raised any procedural claims on appeal but rather argues the merits of the Board’s prior decision, we nonetheless concur with the Board that there are no procedural violations. Furthermore, inasmuch as the Board did not address the merits of claimant’s case upon reconsideration, we decline to do the same here.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 A.D.2d 734, 628 N.Y.S.2d 1020, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-mayhew-nyappdiv-1995.