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 Richard C. BURKE, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 6, 2003, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he voluntarily left his employment without good cause.
Claimant worked for the employer as an account manager for just over 2 1/212 years. On March 27, 2003, he was advised by his supervisor that his position was being eliminated due to downsizing and that he was going to be laid off as of April 7, 2003. Rather than continuing to work until that day, he resigned from his position-effective the next day-to start to look for another job. Thereafter, claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits, but his application was denied on the basis that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. He now appeals.
We affirm. It is well settled that resigning in anticipation of a scheduled discharge date does not constitute good cause for leaving employment (see Matter of Maleknia [Commissioner of Labor], 7 A.D.3d 867, 776 N.Y.S.2d 913 [2004]; Matter of Ford [Commissioner of Labor], 2 A.D.3d 1132, 1133, 768 N.Y.S.2d 700 [2003] ). Here, claimant admitted that he left work before the date of his scheduled lay off to look for another job although he could have continued to work for the employer and get paid through April 7, 2003. Consequently, the Board properly concluded that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause. Claimant's reliance on Matter of Kalichman (Ross), 81 A.D.2d 961, 439 N.Y.S.2d 718 [1981] and Matter of Grieco (Levine), 41 A.D.2d 799, 341 N.Y.S.2d 646 [1973] do not compel a contrary conclusion, as the employers in those cases agreed to move up the termination date, unlike here.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
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: October 28, 2004
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)