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 Barbara TOUSSAINT, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 16, 2004, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.
The record establishes that claimant was required to complete 18 credit hours and pass two exams by a particular date in order to be licensed and continue her employment as a teacher. When claimant failed to complete three credit hours and pass one of the exams by the deadline, she was discharged. Inasmuch as claimant failed to comply with the licensing requirements of her employment in a timely manner, substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause pursuant to the doctrine of provoked discharge (see Matter of Husain [Sweeney], 217 A.D.2d 735, 629 N.Y.S.2d 105 [1995]; Matter of Hannah [New York City Bd. of Educ.-Hartnett], 144 A.D.2d 765, 534 N.Y.S.2d 752 [1988] ). Claimant's contention that she was unaware that she was required to pass the exams by a certain date presented a credibility issue which the Board was free to resolve in favor of the employer's statement to the contrary (see Matter of Davila [Commissioner of Labor], 13 A.D.3d 1043, 1044, 786 N.Y.S.2d 666 [2004] ). Claimant's remaining contention, that the hearing transcript was inadequate for meaningful judicial review, is without merit.
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: April 07, 2005
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)