In re the Claim of Hulin
Opinion of the Court
Claimant worked for over seven years as supervisor in her
On appeal, the employer contends that the Board’s determination is not supported by substantial evidence and that claimant should have been disqualified because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. At the hearing, the executive director testified that when she saw claimant on Monday, she told her that "the problems in [her] department were very serious and I did not have confidence that she would be able to correct this problem and then I asked her to consider resigning”. Although the executive director denied that she told claimant to resign immediately or that claimant would be fired if she did not resign, this was contradicted by claimant’s own testimony that she was told not only that she must resign, but also that she had "no choice”. Thus, a credibility issue was presented which the Board resolved in claimant’s favor. Based on the foregoing, the Board could properly find that claimant was asked to resign immediately and did not voluntarily leave her employment without good cause (see, Matter of Ziembiec [Ross], 62 AD2d 1105; cf., Matter of Grieco [Levine], 41 AD2d 799).
Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Weiss, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Levine, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.