In re the Claim of Schipani

232 A.D.2d 802, 649 N.Y.S.2d 344, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10285
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 17, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 4, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant testified that a combination of factors caused her to quit her job as manager /stylist of a beauty salon, including shortage of staff, her employer’s decision not to give managers such as herself a bonus and being overlooked for a promotional opportunity. Neither general dissatisfaction with job conditions (see, Matter of Wigutow [Roberts], 138 AD2d 817) nor displeasure with promotional opportunities (see, Matter of Bermudez [Hudacs], 183 AD2d 1088) suffices as a valid excuse to terminate employment and collect unemployment insurance benefits. Claimant’s complaints constitute nothing more than these types of dissatisfaction, thereby establishing substantial evidence for the Board’s decision finding that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Peters and Spain, 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

In re the Claim of Schipani, 232 A.D.2d 802, 649 N.Y.S.2d 344, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10285 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

232 A.D.2d 802 (In re the Claim of Schipani) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re the Claim of Ruballo
286 A.D.2d 817 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)