In re the Claim of Retzlaff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Retzlaff

207 A.D.2d 943, 616 N.Y.S.2d 677, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8953

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

DecidedSeptember 22, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 207 A.D.2d 943 (In re the Claim of Retzlaff) 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 Retzlaff, 207 A.D.2d 943, 616 N.Y.S.2d 677, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8953 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 16, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

The Board found that claimant refused to return to work following her maternity leave because the employer would not pay her the differential between her salary and her disability payments during that period. The Board also found, however, that there was no firm agreement prior to the start of her maternity leave that she would receive such payments. Dissatisfaction with wages is not considered good cause for leaving one’s employment. Given the record before this Court, there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion that claimant’s decision not to return to work was for personal and noncompelling reasons, and was therefore without good cause. Claimant’s arguments to the contrary raise matters of credibility which were for the Board to resolve.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, White, Casey and Weiss, 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 April 16, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

The Board found that claimant refused to return to work following her maternity leave because the employer would not pay her the differential between her salary and her disability payments during that period. The Board also found, however, that there was no firm agreement prior to the start of her maternity leave that she would receive such payments. Dissatisfaction with wages is not considered good cause for leaving one’s employment. Given the record before this Court, there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion that claimant’s decision not to return to work was for personal and noncompelling reasons, and was therefore without good cause. Claimant’s arguments to the contrary raise matters of credibility which were for the Board to resolve.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, White, Casey and Weiss, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 943, 616 N.Y.S.2d 677, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8953, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-retzlaff-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack