In re the Claim of Siff

32 A.D.2d 699, 299 N.Y.S.2d 888, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3966
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 16, 1969
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 32 A.D.2d 699 (In re the Claim of Siff) 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 Siff, 32 A.D.2d 699, 299 N.Y.S.2d 888, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3966 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Opinion

Greenblott, J.

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 1, 1968, which held him ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1, par. [a]). Appellant, a field engineer, traveled extensively throughout the continental United States for his employer. The employment agreement provided: “ Employee understands that the assignment may change and that he may he required by circumstances or by direction of the Company to move to other areas.” Appellant contends that he tendered his resignation because he did not anticipate at the time of hiring that he would have to relocate as often as was required by the employer. When he accepted this position, six months earlier, appellant was [700]*700aware of the conditions and circumstances upon which he later relied to justify his voluntary separation from employment. The board found that appellant had failed to establish “that the conditions of his. employment were not those anticipated under the employment agreement.” The record amply supports the board’s determination that claimant voluntarily left his employment without good cause (Matter of Hansen [Catherwood], 31 A D 2d 680). We have examined appellant’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Aulisi, Staley, Jr., and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum by Greenblott, J.

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

Related

In re the Claim of Church
186 A.D.2d 853 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Maira
182 A.D.2d 962 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Holt
178 A.D.2d 863 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Hidy
169 A.D.2d 914 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 A.D.2d 699, 299 N.Y.S.2d 888, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3966, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-siff-nyappdiv-1969.