In re the Claim of Wright

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Wright

295 A.D.2d 785, 744 N.Y.S.2d 541, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6518

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

DecidedJune 20, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 295 A.D.2d 785 (In re the Claim of Wright) 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 Wright, 295 A.D.2d 785, 744 N.Y.S.2d 541, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6518 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 24, 2001, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from her employment as a die cutter, contending that she no longer could afford to reside in the area where her employment was located, and moved into a trailer home located approximately 200 miles away from the employer’s place of business. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she left her employment for personal and noncompelling reasons. Based upon the [786]*786record before us, we affirm. No evidence was presented to show that claimant had made an effort to find more affordable housing within commuting distance of her employment (see, Matter of Dampman [Sweeney], 246 AD2d 940, 941). We therefore conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision that claimant left her employment under disqualifying circumstances. Claimant’s remaining contentions, to the extent they are properly before us, have been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, 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 24, 2001, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Claimant resigned from her employment as a die cutter, contending that she no longer could afford to reside in the area where her employment was located, and moved into a trailer home located approximately 200 miles away from the employer’s place of business. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she left her employment for personal and noncompelling reasons. Based upon the [786]*786record before us, we affirm. No evidence was presented to show that claimant had made an effort to find more affordable housing within commuting distance of her employment (see, Matter of Dampman [Sweeney], 246 AD2d 940, 941). We therefore conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision that claimant left her employment under disqualifying circumstances. Claimant’s remaining contentions, to the extent they are properly before us, have been examined and found to be lacking in merit.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 785, 744 N.Y.S.2d 541, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6518, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-wright-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack