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 Karen L. JOHNSON, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 15, 2001, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.
Claimant left her employment as a station agent with the New York City Transit Authority after foreclosure proceedings were commenced with regard to the Pennsylvania residence that she shared with her husband and children. Claimant testified that she and her family then moved to Virginia after determining that apartments in the New York City area were prohibitively expensive and that a long-distance commute, such as the one she had been making from Pennsylvania to her employment in the City, was unduly onerous and costly. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ultimately ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her reasons for leaving her employment were personal and noncompelling.
We affirm. The record discloses that claimant failed to present evidence that she had undertaken an active search for affordable housing either within the confines of the City or outside the City but within reasonable commuting distance of her employment (see, Matter of Mashnouk [Sweeney], 247 A.D.2d 811, 812, 668 N.Y.S.2d 513; Matter of Powers [Sweeney], 227 A.D.2d 788, 642 N.Y.S.2d 383). Under the circumstances presented here, substantial evidence supports the Board's decision that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause.
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: June 20, 2002
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)