In re the Claim of Klein
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re the Claim of Dingman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- In re the Claim of Dingman (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- In re the Claim of Jones (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- In re the Claim of Culp (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- In re the Claim of Bingel (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 26, 2002, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.
Approximately two weeks after starting her job as a service coordinator for the employer, claimant quit contending that the fumes at work were making her ill. Although claimant mentioned her condition to her son’s allergist who told her to stay away from the fumes, she admitted that she did not consult her doctor. In the absence of any medical documentation that a physician advised her to quit and claimant having declined repeated offers for an adjournment to produce such evidence, substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant voluntarily left her employment without good cause (see Matter of Krinsky [Sweeney], 238 AD2d 659 [1997]; Matter of Fumia [Nothnagle Home Sec. — Sweeney], 222 AD2d 923 [1995]; Matter of Ehrenberg [Doubleday Book & Music Clubs — Hudacs], 197 AD2d 734 [1993]).
Mercure, J.P., Peters, Spain, Rose and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.