In re the Claim of Wallenhorst

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Wallenhorst

209 A.D.2d 809, 618 N.Y.S.2d 154, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11102

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

DecidedNovember 10, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 209 A.D.2d 809 (In re the Claim of Wallenhorst) 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 Wallenhorst, 209 A.D.2d 809, 618 N.Y.S.2d 154, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11102 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 23, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant, a union member, testified that he quit his job as an electrician for the employer, a nonunion contractor, because he anticipated being recalled to union work and was concerned about losing union privileges. The evidence reveals, however, that claimant had no basis for concern over union sanctions. Moreover, the employer testified that there was continuing work for claimant had he not quit. Claimant’s contentions to the contrary merely presented a credibility question for the Board to resolve. Finally, the overpayment of benefits is recoverable pursuant to Labor Law § 597 (4).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey and Yesawich Jr., 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 December 23, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant, a union member, testified that he quit his job as an electrician for the employer, a nonunion contractor, because he anticipated being recalled to union work and was concerned about losing union privileges. The evidence reveals, however, that claimant had no basis for concern over union sanctions. Moreover, the employer testified that there was continuing work for claimant had he not quit. Claimant’s contentions to the contrary merely presented a credibility question for the Board to resolve. Finally, the overpayment of benefits is recoverable pursuant to Labor Law § 597 (4).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 809, 618 N.Y.S.2d 154, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-wallenhorst-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack