From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Shenker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 6, 1997
244 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

November 6, 1997

Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


Claimant was employed as an architect for an architectural firm. On his last day of work, claimant informed his supervisor and the company's principal that he could no longer work with his supervisor or on the project to which he was assigned. He gave no reason for his apparent dissatisfaction. The company's principal told claimant that if he could not complete his work under his assigned supervisor, he should leave. Claimant left and did not return to work thereafter. In our view, the record supports a finding that claimant was not fired and that he voluntarily left his employment for personal and noncompelling reasons. It has been held that neither dissatisfaction with work nor conflict with a supervisor constitutes good cause for leaving one's employment (see, Matter of Collins [Sweeney], 239 A.D.2d 758, 759). Inasmuch as substantial evidence supports the decision that claimant is disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause, it must be upheld.

Cardona, P. J., White, Casey, Peters and Carpinello, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Shenker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Nov 6, 1997
244 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Matter of Shenker

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of DMITRIY M. SHENKER, Appellant. JOHN E…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Nov 6, 1997

Citations

244 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
663 N.Y.S.2d 913

Citing Cases

Matter of Odock

Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision that claimant was…

Matter of Najda

We affirm as there is substantial evidence in the record to support the Board's decision. Neither conflict…