In re the Claim of Skinner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Skinner

32 A.D.3d 1065, 821 N.Y.S.2d 293

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

DecidedSeptember 14, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.3d 1065 (In re the Claim of Skinner) 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 Skinner, 32 A.D.3d 1065, 821 N.Y.S.2d 293 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 7, 2005, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant voluntarily left her employment as a licensed practical nurse without good cause. The record establishes that in lieu of terminating claimant’s employment due to absenteeism, the employer granted claimant’s request to transfer to the night shift. Claimant, however, refused to accept the new schedule because of the employer’s caveat that she would not be permitted to return to the day shift. Inasmuch as continuing work was available to claimant, we will not disturb the Board’s decision that claimant’s dissatisfaction with the condition of the requested work schedule did not constitute good cause to leave her employment (see Matter of Smith [Commissioner of Labor], 20 AD3d 844 [2005]; Matter of Adorisio [Commissioner of Labor], 18 AD3d 942 [2005]).

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Spain, Carpinello and Lahtinen, 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 June 7, 2005, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant voluntarily left her employment as a licensed practical nurse without good cause. The record establishes that in lieu of terminating claimant’s employment due to absenteeism, the employer granted claimant’s request to transfer to the night shift. Claimant, however, refused to accept the new schedule because of the employer’s caveat that she would not be permitted to return to the day shift. Inasmuch as continuing work was available to claimant, we will not disturb the Board’s decision that claimant’s dissatisfaction with the condition of the requested work schedule did not constitute good cause to leave her employment (see Matter of Smith [Commissioner of Labor], 20 AD3d 844 [2005]; Matter of Adorisio [Commissioner of Labor], 18 AD3d 942 [2005]).

Mercure, J.P., Crew III, Spain, Carpinello and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.3d 1065, 821 N.Y.S.2d 293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-skinner-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack