SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, THIRD DEPARTMENT
April 21, 1969
IN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF PAUL BRINKMAN, APPELLANT. MARTIN P. CATHERWOOD, AS INDUSTRIAL COMMISSIONER, RESPONDENT
Cooke, J. Gibson, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Cooke and Greenblott, JJ., concur in memorandum by Cooke, J.
Appeal by claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 9, 1968, disqualifying claimant, a driving instructor, from unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment without good cause by provoking his discharge. It is undisputed that claimant insisted that his compensation for each driving test or lesson be raised to 70% of the amount taken in by employer in connection with his work, in effect a substantial increase over the amount then being paid, and thereafter no more work was assigned to him. What constitutes good cause within paragraph (a) of subdivision 1 of section 593 of the Labor Law is a question of fact, the resolution of which is within the province of the board if supported by substantial evidence (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of D'Arcangelis [ Catherwood ], 29 A.D.2d 706) and, on the record here, we cannot disturb the board's determination, as dissatisfaction with the recompense paid does not ipso facto constitute good cause (Matter of Haynes [ Catherwood ], 30 A.D.2d 722; Matter of Simson [ Catherwood ], 18 A.D.2d 744; Matter of Sellers [ J. W. Mays, Inc. -- Catherwood ], 13 A.D.2d 204).
Decision affirmed, without costs.
© 1998 VersusLaw Inc.