Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: the Claim of Milissa CARUSO, Appellant. John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 24, 1996, 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.
Claimant was a production coordinator for the employer, a manufacturer of children's clothes, until she resigned because she believed that she was going to be passed over for a promotion. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because she had voluntarily left her employment without good cause. The record reveals that claimant was passed over for two promotions. When she complained to her employer, she was promised that she would be offered the next promotional opportunity. She resigned when a third opportunity became available and she was not immediately offered the position. Claimant was, however, offered the promotion before her resignation became effective, but rejected it because she was warned that the promotion would be on a trial basis and that she was subject to dismissal if things did not work out; she also believed that the warning signified the employer's intent to ultimately replace her. An employee's abandonment of his or her employment in anticipation of discharge has not been held to constitute good cause for leaving employment under the Labor Law (see, Matter of Krinsky [Sweeney], 238 A.D.2d 659, 655 N.Y.S.2d 678). The Board's decision is, accordingly, affirmed.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: March 05, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)