Opinion
December 3, 1992
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
Claimant's husband had no definite work prospects in Michigan when claimant quit her job in New York; in fact, the couple relocated to Florida when claimant's husband did not find work in Michigan. Under these circumstances, there is substantial evidence to support the conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant did not have a compelling reason to relocate with her husband to Michigan and that she therefore voluntarily left her employment without good cause (see, Matter of Behnke [White Carriage Corp. — Roberts], 97 A.D.2d 679; Matter of Fallon [Catherwood], 28 A.D.2d 1016). We also note that claimant presented no evidence that she could no longer afford to live in the area where she had been employed (see, Matter of Palmieri [Catherwood], 33 A.D.2d 588). Furthermore, although claimant testified that her department was being transferred to another location and that she believed she would not be offered a position in the transferred area, quitting in anticipation of discharge is not good cause for leaving one's employment (see, Matter of Manson [Hartford Acc. Indem. Group — Levine], 50 A.D.2d 980).
Mikoll, J.P., Yesawich Jr., Levine, Mahoney and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.