In re the Claim of Mullen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Mullen

301 A.D.2d 936, 754 N.Y.S.2d 116, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 372

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

DecidedJanuary 23, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 301 A.D.2d 936 (In re the Claim of Mullen) 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 Mullen, 301 A.D.2d 936, 754 N.Y.S.2d 116, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 372 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 17, 2001, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant was employed by a temporary services agency and was assigned to work as an assembler of electronic circuit boards. Four days after accepting the assignment, claimant resigned claiming that he had been subjected to sexual harassment. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board denied claimant’s subsequent application for unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. We affirm. Even if any of claimant’s complaints regarding his coworkers were valid, he never brought the problem to the employer’s attention or reported it to the temporary services agency before quitting. Failure to get along with one’s coworkers does not necessarily constitute good cause for leaving employment, particularly where, as here, claimant failed to take the steps needed to protect such employment (see Matter of Chereshnev [Commissioner of Labor], 296 AD2d 804; Matter of Steates [Commissioner of Labor], 260 AD2d 839). Under these circumstances, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Rose, 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 17, 2001, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant was employed by a temporary services agency and was assigned to work as an assembler of electronic circuit boards. Four days after accepting the assignment, claimant resigned claiming that he had been subjected to sexual harassment. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board denied claimant’s subsequent application for unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. We affirm. Even if any of claimant’s complaints regarding his coworkers were valid, he never brought the problem to the employer’s attention or reported it to the temporary services agency before quitting. Failure to get along with one’s coworkers does not necessarily constitute good cause for leaving employment, particularly where, as here, claimant failed to take the steps needed to protect such employment (see Matter of Chereshnev [Commissioner of Labor], 296 AD2d 804; Matter of Steates [Commissioner of Labor], 260 AD2d 839). Under these circumstances, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 936, 754 N.Y.S.2d 116, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-mullen-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack