KATHLEEN MOZGAI VS. BOARD OF REVIEW (BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR) ( 2020 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the
internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-2820-18T4
KATHLEEN MOZGAI,
Appellant,
v.
BOARD OF REVIEW,
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
and KINDRED HOSPITALS
EAST, LLC,
Respondents.
Submitted July 15, 2020 – Decided July 29, 2020
Before Judges Hoffman and Currier.
On appeal from the Board of Review, Department
of Labor, Docket No. 166,115.
Kathleen Mozgai, appellant pro se.
Gurbir S. Grewal, Attorney General, attorney for
respondent Board of Review (Donna Sue Arons,
Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Achchana C.
Ranasinghe, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
Respondent Kindred Hospitals East, LLC, has not filed
a brief.
PER CURIAM
Claimant Kathleen Mozgai appeals from the January 11, 2019 decision of
the Board of Review (Board) finding her ineligible for unemployment benefits
pursuant to N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(a). We affirm.
We derive the facts from the telephonic hearing before the Appeal
Tribunal. Claimant was employed by defendant Kindred Hospitals East, LLC.
She resigned from her position in September 2018, advising her employer she
needed to move out of New Jersey because of a personal hardship.
During the hearing in November 2018, claimant stated she had filed for
bankruptcy and lost her home in 2018. Therefore, she had relocated to Florida
and was looking for a job.
Claimant submitted a claim for unemployment benefits. The Deputy
Director of Unemployment Insurance determined claimant had left work
voluntarily, disqualifying her for benefits.
Following claimant's appeal of the determination, a telephonic hearing
was conducted before the Appeal Tribunal. In its November 30, 2018 decision,
the appeals examiner noted:
A-2820-18T4
2
[C]laimant voluntarily left the job to relocate to the
state of Florida due to a personal financial hardship
. . . . The claimant's leaving to relocate is a personal
reason, which is not attributable to the work.
Therefore, the claimant is disqualified for benefits . . .
under N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(a), as the claimant left work
voluntarily without good cause attributable to such
work.
The Board affirmed the Appeal Tribunal's decision.
On appeal, claimant states she left her job voluntarily. However, her
leaving was due to a financial hardship and she was unable to maintain a home
in New Jersey. Therefore, she contends she established good cause for her
leaving, entitling her to unemployment benefits.
We are mindful that our review of administrative agency decisions is
limited. We will not disturb an agency's action unless it was clearly "arbitrary,
capricious, or unreasonable . . . ." Brady v. Bd. of Review, 152 N.J. 197, 210
(1997) (citation omitted).
N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(a) provides that an employee who "has left work
voluntarily without good cause attributable to such work" is disqualified for
unemployment compensation benefits. "Under this section, the threshold
question is whether an applicant for unemployment compensation benefits left
his [or her] job 'voluntarily.'" Lord v. Bd. of Review, 425 N.J. Super. 187, 190-
91 (App. Div. 2012). An employee has left work "voluntarily" within the
A-2820-18T4
3
meaning of the statute "only if 'the decision whether to go or to stay lay at the
time with the worker alone.'" Id. at 191 (quoting Campbell Soup Co. v. Bd. of
Review, 13 N.J. 431, 435 (1953)). If the applicant leaves voluntarily "he or she
is eligible for unemployment compensation benefits only if that separation was
for 'good cause attributable to the work.'" Ibid. (quoting N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(a));
see also Utley v. Bd. of Review, 194 N.J. 534, 544 (2008).
Here, claimant admits she submitted a letter of resignation and voluntarily
left her job for reasons unattributable to the work. Therefore, pursuant to the
statute, claimant is not entitled to unemployment benefits. See Roche v. Bd. of
Review, 156 N.J. Super. 63, 65 (App. Div. 1978) (disqualifying claimant from
receiving unemployment benefits when she left her job to relocate due to an
intolerable living situation); see also N.J.A.C. 12:17-9.1(e)(6) ("Relocating to
another area for personal reasons" is considered voluntarily leaving work
without good cause attributable to the work).
Affirmed.
A-2820-18T4
4