In re the Claim of Scattone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Scattone

183 A.D.2d 1095, 583 N.Y.S.2d 692, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7342

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

DecidedMay 21, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 183 A.D.2d 1095 (In re the Claim of Scattone) 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 Scattone, 183 A.D.2d 1095, 583 N.Y.S.2d 692, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7342 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 27, 1991, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

When claimant was assigned to the job by the temporary employment agency he was told that he would have to work between 35 to 40 hours per week. It was at claimant’s request that he was assigned to full-time work. Claimant admitted, however, that on his first two days of work he left after about half a day to attend to personal matters. He also admitted that he had appointments during the whole first week of the job. On the third day he was asked to leave because he was not working the necessary hours. Given these facts, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board concluded that claimant’s "intention to keep personal appointments while ostensibly available for a full day’s work” constituted a voluntary separation from employment without good cause. We find this decision to be supported by substantial evidence and therefore affirm (see, Matter of Williams [Levine], 50 AD2d 683; Matter of Lewis [Catherwood], 25 AD2d 473).

Weiss, P. J., Yesawich Jr., Crew III, Casey and Harvey, 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 September 27, 1991, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

When claimant was assigned to the job by the temporary employment agency he was told that he would have to work between 35 to 40 hours per week. It was at claimant’s request that he was assigned to full-time work. Claimant admitted, however, that on his first two days of work he left after about half a day to attend to personal matters. He also admitted that he had appointments during the whole first week of the job. On the third day he was asked to leave because he was not working the necessary hours. Given these facts, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board concluded that claimant’s "intention to keep personal appointments while ostensibly available for a full day’s work” constituted a voluntary separation from employment without good cause. We find this decision to be supported by substantial evidence and therefore affirm (see, Matter of Williams [Levine], 50 AD2d 683; Matter of Lewis [Catherwood], 25 AD2d 473).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 A.D.2d 1095, 583 N.Y.S.2d 692, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-scattone-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack