In re the Claim of Watford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Watford

244 A.D.2d 725, 666 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11754

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

DecidedNovember 20, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 725 (In re the Claim of Watford) 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 Watford, 244 A.D.2d 725, 666 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11754 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 7, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from his position as coordinator of life skills education for the employer following a dispute over increased job duties and responsibilities. The Unemployment [726]*726Insurance Appeal Board disqualified claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he had voluntarily resigned from his employment without good cause. We affirm. It has been held that dissatisfaction with one’s job, including dissatisfaction over an increase in workload or job responsibilities, does not constitute good cause for leaving one’s employment (see, Matter of Turano [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 748). We conclude that the record contains substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion that claimant left his employment under disqualifying circumstances.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and White, 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 April 7, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from his position as coordinator of life skills education for the employer following a dispute over increased job duties and responsibilities. The Unemployment [726]*726Insurance Appeal Board disqualified claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he had voluntarily resigned from his employment without good cause. We affirm. It has been held that dissatisfaction with one’s job, including dissatisfaction over an increase in workload or job responsibilities, does not constitute good cause for leaving one’s employment (see, Matter of Turano [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 748). We conclude that the record contains substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion that claimant left his employment under disqualifying circumstances.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and White, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 725, 666 N.Y.S.2d 48, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-watford-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack