From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Matter of the Claim of Spark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 31, 2002
290 A.D.2d 914 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

90277

January 31, 2002.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 31, 2000, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its original decision ruling that, inter alia, claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

Victoria Spark, Cornwall, appellant pro se.

Canter, Valvano Reed L.L.P. (Mitchell J. Canter of counsel), Suffern, for Canter Valvano L.L.P., respondent.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Marjorie S. Leff of counsel), New York City, for Commissioner of Labor, respondent.

Before: Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and, Mugglin, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Substantial evidence supports the finding of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant left her employment as a legal secretary and receptionist for personal and noncompelling reasons and that she made willful false statements in order to obtain benefits. Claimant quit her job after five weeks, informing the employer that she had found a position that offered more flexible hours, which would make it easier for her to run errands during the day. In her subsequent application for unemployment insurance benefits, however, claimant reported that she had been fired.

Dissatisfaction with one's work hours has been held not to constitute good cause for leaving employment, especially in cases such as the matter under review, where the claimant was made aware of the required work schedule prior to starting the job (see, Matter of Hunt [Commissioner of Labor], 286 A.D.2d 819; Matter of Anthony [Commissioner of Labor], 257 A.D.2d 876). Claimant's assertion that she did not quit her job but was fired on the last day of her employment raised a question of credibility for resolution by the Hearing Officer (see, Matter of King [Sweeney], 243 A.D.2d 802). Under the circumstances presented here, we find no reason to disturb the Board's finding that claimant made willful false statements to obtain unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Epps [Commissioner of Labor], 276 A.D.2d 997). The remaining contentions raised by claimant have been reviewed and found to lack merit.

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re Matter of the Claim of Spark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 31, 2002
290 A.D.2d 914 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

In re Matter of the Claim of Spark

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of VICTORIA SPARK, Appellant. CANTER VALVANO…

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

Date published: Jan 31, 2002

Citations

290 A.D.2d 914 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
736 N.Y.S.2d 639

Citing Cases

In the Matter of the Claim of Lester

It is well settled that a claimant's dissatisfaction with his or her scheduled work hours may not constitute…

In re Matter of Hughes

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant left her…