Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/In re the Claim of Snapperman

In re the Claim of Snapperman

50 A.D.2d 1029, 377 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12026
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 23, 1975
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 50 A.D.2d 1029 (In re the Claim of Snapperman) 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 Snapperman, 50 A.D.2d 1029, 377 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12026 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 3, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits effective July 2, 1974 because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Claimant, employed as an assistant buyer, elected to retire early allegedly due to harassment by her supervisor. She was not required to retire when she did and, although she claimed the harassment caused her to have hypertension, she produced no medical evidence regarding her alleged condition. The question whether claimant left her employment for health reasons was a factual one within the province of the board (Matter of Wilensky [Catherwood] 33 AD2d 830). A personality clash with one’s supervisor does not constitute good cause for leaving one’s employment (Matter of Socol [Catherwood] 29 AD2d 1020). There was substantial evidence to support the board’s decision. Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Koreman, Main and Larkin, JJ., concur.

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

Related

In re the Claim of Ehrenberg
197 A.D.2d 734 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re the Claim of Layton
196 A.D.2d 943 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re the Claim of Sarpolis
194 A.D.2d 1052 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re the Claim of Landau
187 A.D.2d 841 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Krokos
184 A.D.2d 871 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Rossano
181 A.D.2d 937 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Wolfbiss
173 A.D.2d 1047 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Ratkewicz
173 A.D.2d 999 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Black
168 A.D.2d 728 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
In re the Claim of Alexander
84 A.D.2d 601 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)
In re the Claim of Gaiser
82 A.D.2d 629 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 A.D.2d 1029, 377 N.Y.S.2d 281, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12026, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-snapperman-nyappdiv-1975.