In re the Claim of Oscodar

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Oscodar

25 A.D.2d 913, 270 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4147

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

DecidedMay 20, 1966

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 A.D.2d 913 (In re the Claim of Oscodar) 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 Oscodar, 25 A.D.2d 913, 270 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4147 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Aulisi, J.

Appeal by claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which disqualified him from receiving benefits for having left his employment without good cause (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1, par. [a]). Claimant, a salesman of stocks and bonds, having been granted a three months’ leave of absence failed to return to his job following the expiration of his leave. The board found that although claimant had ample time within which to make known to his employer the reason for his delay in returning to work until six months later, he never made any attempt to obtain an extension of his leave. This the board concluded constitutes the voluntary leaving of employment. What constitutes good cause is a question of fact within the province of the board and if supported by substantial evidence, as is the case in the record here, there is nothing to justify disturbing the board’s determination (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Ruggirello [Catherwood], 25 A D 2d 597; Matter of Caraballo [Catherwood], 25 A D 2d 580). Decision affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Aulisi, J.

Appeal by claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which disqualified him from receiving benefits for having left his employment without good cause (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1, par. [a]). Claimant, a salesman of stocks and bonds, having been granted a three months’ leave of absence failed to return to his job following the expiration of his leave. The board found that although claimant had ample time within which to make known to his employer the reason for his delay in returning to work until six months later, he never made any attempt to obtain an extension of his leave. This the board concluded constitutes the voluntary leaving of employment. What constitutes good cause is a question of fact within the province of the board and if supported by substantial evidence, as is the case in the record here, there is nothing to justify disturbing the board’s determination (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Ruggirello [Catherwood], 25 A D 2d 597; Matter of Caraballo [Catherwood], 25 A D 2d 580). Decision affirmed, without costs.

Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 A.D.2d 913, 270 N.Y.S.2d 81, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-oscodar-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack