In re the Claim of Welle

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Welle

239 A.D.2d 640, 656 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4522

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 1, 1997·Published

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 22, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from her job as the executive director of a council on alcoholism due to her perception that the council was neither adhering to its bylaws nor providing her with the requisite supervision and support she needed, thereby increasing her job responsibilities. Although claimant complained on numerous occasions about the structure of the council, she never notified her employer that she would resign if the situation was not corrected. Claimant’s employer kept her position open after she resigned but she refused to return to work. Claimant’s general dissatisfaction with various aspects of her [641] employment constitutes a personal and noncompelling reason for her resignation (see, Matter of Paccione [Sweeney], 213 AD2d 931). We find that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s finding that claimant voluntárily left her employment without good cause (see, id.; Matter of Mattia [Town of Parma—Hudacs], 192 AD2d 1047) and, accordingly, we decline to disturb it.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Crew III, White and Peters, 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 January 22, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from her job as the executive director of a council on alcoholism due to her perception that the council was neither adhering to its bylaws nor providing her with the requisite supervision and support she needed, thereby increasing her job responsibilities. Although claimant complained on numerous occasions about the structure of the council, she never notified her employer that she would resign if the situation was not corrected. Claimant’s employer kept her position open after she resigned but she refused to return to work. Claimant’s general dissatisfaction with various aspects of her [641] employment constitutes a personal and noncompelling reason for her resignation (see, Matter of Paccione [Sweeney], 213 AD2d 931). We find that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s finding that claimant voluntárily left her employment without good cause (see, id.; Matter of Mattia [Town of Parma—Hudacs], 192 AD2d 1047) and, accordingly, we decline to disturb it.

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

In re the Claim of Welle, 239 A.D.2d 640, 656 N.Y.S.2d 570, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4522 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

239 A.D.2d 640 (In re the Claim of Welle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related