From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re the Claim of Epps

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 26, 2000
276 A.D.2d 997 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

October 26, 2000.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 30, 1999, which ruled, inter alia, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

D. Jeffrey Gosch, Syracuse, for appellant.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Bessie Bazile of counsel), New York City, for respondent.

Before: Spain, J.P., Graffeo, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant, a meter reader for a utility company, voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Claimant, who lives in the City of Albany, accepted a six-month assignment in the City of Glens Falls, Warren County. At the end of the assignment, claimant declined the opportunity to continue working at the same location due to the lengthy commute and because her two teenage children were unsupervised and experiencing behavioral problems. Although claimant was placed on the employer's rehire list in accordance with the collective bargaining agreement, the terms of the collective bargaining agreement are not dispositive of whether claimant is disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Desmarais [Sweeney], 234 A.D.2d 839, 839-840, lv denied 90 N.Y.2d 876).

Moreover, one who accepts employment knowing the conditions thereof cannot later invoke those conditions to demonstrate good cause for leaving such employment (see, Matter of Dunn [Sweeney], 243 A.D.2d 798;see, Matter of Cinque [Sweeney], 224 A.D.2d 912). In view of the foregoing and given the fact that continuing work was available to claimant (see, Matter of Wiater [Commissioner of Labor], 267 A.D.2d 578), we find no reason to disturb the Board's decision. We also find evidence in the record to support the Board's finding that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits inasmuch as claimant, aware that continuing work was available, indicated on her application for benefits that she was no longer employed due to lack of work (see, Matter of Zipes [Commissioner of Labor], 274 A.D.2d 819, 710 N.Y.S.2d 736; Matter of Attara [Commissioner of Labor], 257 A.D.2d 936).

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re the Claim of Epps

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 26, 2000
276 A.D.2d 997 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

In re the Claim of Epps

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of LINDA E. EPPS, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF…

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

Date published: Oct 26, 2000

Citations

276 A.D.2d 997 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
715 N.Y.S.2d 89

Citing Cases

Matter of the Claim of Radulescu

Claimant, employed as a shipping supervisor, resigned from her employment after she lost her ride to work…

In the Matter of the Claim of Hunt

Continuing work was available to claimant and his dissatisfaction with his hours did not constitute good…