In re the Claim of Schifferle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Schifferle

33 A.D.2d 847, 305 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2601

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

DecidedDecember 11, 1969

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 33 A.D.2d 847 (In re the Claim of Schifferle) 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 Schifferle, 33 A.D.2d 847, 305 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2601 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Greenblott, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 24, 1969, disqualifying claimant from unemployment insurance benefits. Appellant, an employee of the United States Post Office, was also a full-time college student. When a change in his working hours presented a conflict with his school work, he quit his job. The board’s finding that “ claimant left his employment for a personal, non-compelling reason, which does not constitute good cause within the meaning of the law”, is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld. The determination of the Federal agency as to the reason for appellant’s separation from employment, as [848]*848“ Resignation ‘ further education ’ ” is binding on the board. (IT. S. Code, tit. 5, § 8506; Matter of Miller [Catherwood], 30 A D' 2d 610.) “ The subsidization of an employee’s education is not among the purposes of the unemployment insurance act.” (Matter of Dreistadt [Catherwood], 29 A D 2d 807.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Greenblott and Sweeney, JJ., concur in memorandum by Greenblott, J.

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

Greenblott, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 24, 1969, disqualifying claimant from unemployment insurance benefits. Appellant, an employee of the United States Post Office, was also a full-time college student. When a change in his working hours presented a conflict with his school work, he quit his job. The board’s finding that “ claimant left his employment for a personal, non-compelling reason, which does not constitute good cause within the meaning of the law”, is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld. The determination of the Federal agency as to the reason for appellant’s separation from employment, as [848]*848“ Resignation ‘ further education ’ ” is binding on the board. (IT. S. Code, tit. 5, § 8506; Matter of Miller [Catherwood], 30 A D' 2d 610.) “ The subsidization of an employee’s education is not among the purposes of the unemployment insurance act.” (Matter of Dreistadt [Catherwood], 29 A D 2d 807.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Greenblott and Sweeney, JJ., concur in memorandum by Greenblott, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 847, 305 N.Y.S.2d 911, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-schifferle-nyappdiv-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack