In re the Claim of Oxendine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Oxendine

49 A.D.2d 784, 372 N.Y.S.2d 255, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10819

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

DecidedSeptember 18, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 49 A.D.2d 784 (In re the Claim of Oxendine) 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 Oxendine, 49 A.D.2d 784, 372 N.Y.S.2d 255, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10819 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 3, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits effective November 16, 1974 because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Claimant, a handyman who worked in a building owned by the employer realty company, quit his job because the employer stopped permitting him to work overtime. Claimant had a base 40-hour week at $5 [785]*785per hour. His quitting because of the absence of overtime work amounts to a dissatisfaction with his salary which he would not have been justified in refusing in the first instance, wherefore the board was entitled to conclude that his reasons for leaving his job were personal and noncompelling (Matter of Lubin [Catherwood], 34 AD2d 591). Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Larkin and Reynolds,. 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 Appeal Board, filed April 3, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits effective November 16, 1974 because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Claimant, a handyman who worked in a building owned by the employer realty company, quit his job because the employer stopped permitting him to work overtime. Claimant had a base 40-hour week at $5 [785]*785per hour. His quitting because of the absence of overtime work amounts to a dissatisfaction with his salary which he would not have been justified in refusing in the first instance, wherefore the board was entitled to conclude that his reasons for leaving his job were personal and noncompelling (Matter of Lubin [Catherwood], 34 AD2d 591). Decision affirmed, without costs. Greenblott, J. P., Kane, Main, Larkin and Reynolds,. JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 784, 372 N.Y.S.2d 255, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-oxendine-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack