In re the Claim of Zhen Feng Huang

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Zhen Feng Huang

21 A.D.3d 1201, 801 N.Y.S.2d 95

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

DecidedSeptember 22, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 21 A.D.3d 1201 (In re the Claim of Zhen Feng Huang) 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 Zhen Feng Huang, 21 A.D.3d 1201, 801 N.Y.S.2d 95 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, entered September 16, 2004, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant voluntarily left her employment as a receptionist at a dentists’ office without good cause. Claimant testified that she resigned from her employment due to a difficult relationship with one of the dentists in the office who criticized her job performance, limited her responsibility to answer the telephone and twice ordered her to go home and take a break. Nevertheless, it is well settled that failure to get along with, or receiving criticism which is perceived as unduly harsh from, one’s employer generally does not constitute good cause for leaving employment (see Matter of Lokensky [Commissioner of Labor], 19 AD3d 973, 974 [2005]; Matter of Reiblein [Commissioner of Labor], 13 AD3d 712 [2004]; Matter of Micara [Commissioner of Labor], 307 AD2d 568, 568-569 [2003]). Under the circumstances here, even if the dentist was ill-mannered toward claimant, the record supports the Board’s conclusion that the environment was not so intolerable as to justify claimant’s resignation. To the extent preserved for our review, claimant’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, 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, entered September 16, 2004, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant voluntarily left her employment as a receptionist at a dentists’ office without good cause. Claimant testified that she resigned from her employment due to a difficult relationship with one of the dentists in the office who criticized her job performance, limited her responsibility to answer the telephone and twice ordered her to go home and take a break. Nevertheless, it is well settled that failure to get along with, or receiving criticism which is perceived as unduly harsh from, one’s employer generally does not constitute good cause for leaving employment (see Matter of Lokensky [Commissioner of Labor], 19 AD3d 973, 974 [2005]; Matter of Reiblein [Commissioner of Labor], 13 AD3d 712 [2004]; Matter of Micara [Commissioner of Labor], 307 AD2d 568, 568-569 [2003]). Under the circumstances here, even if the dentist was ill-mannered toward claimant, the record supports the Board’s conclusion that the environment was not so intolerable as to justify claimant’s resignation. To the extent preserved for our review, claimant’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

21 A.D.3d 1201, 801 N.Y.S.2d 95, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-zhen-feng-huang-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack