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 Danielle L. ROMMENEY, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 12, 2008, which disqualified claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.
Claimant worked at the front desk of a doctor's office for 2 1/212 years. After she lost her rent stabilized apartment in Brooklyn, she was purportedly unable to find affordable housing in Staten Island near her place of employment. Consequently, she resigned from her position and moved to Florida to live with her mother. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualified claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on the basis that she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. Claimant appeals.
We affirm. The record does not disclose that claimant undertook significant efforts to find a suitable apartment or that her relocation to Florida was necessitated by financial considerations. Although she testified that she could not find an affordable apartment in Staten Island near her workplace, she did not identify any other areas that she looked, and she admitted that she did not look in Brooklyn. In addition, she failed to provide evidence to substantiate her claim that she had to move to Florida due to her financial circumstances. In view of the foregoing, substantial evidence supports the Board's decision that claimant left her employment for personal and noncompelling reasons (see Matter of Berkmann [Commissioner of Labor], 18 A.D.3d 943, 794 N.Y.S.2d 481 [2005]; Matter of Dampman [Sweeney], 246 A.D.2d 940, 941, 667 N.Y.S.2d 999 [1998] ).
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: July 23, 2009
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)