Allessio v Quasarano
Digest no. 7.34
Cite as: Allessio v Quasarano, Macomb Circuit Court, No. 97-1083-AE (August 1, 1997).
Appeal pending: No
Claimant: Marie Allessio
Employer: Laura Quasarano & Nancy Lucido
Docket no.: B96-10527-142392W
Date of decision: August 1, 1997
CIRCUIT COURT HOLDING: Where claimant testified before the Referee that she would work a maximum of 30 hours per week and this was consistent with her pre-hearing statements that she did not want full-time work, she did not meet the eligibility requirements of the Act.
FACTS: Claimant quit her job because her employer cut her hours. She told the Agency and the Referee she was able to work 20 – 25 hours per week and no more than 30 hours per week. The Referee reversed a disqualification under Section 29(1)(a) but held claimant ineligible because not available for full-time work. When claimant appealed to the Board of Review, she asserted she misunderstood the question regarding availability and that she was available for full time work.
DECISION: Claimant is ineligible for benefits under Section 28(1)(c).
RATIONALE: Claimant consistently made statements she was not available to work full-time. Therefore, the Board of Review was justified in concluding she was ineligible for benefits under Section 28(1)(c).
Digest Author: Board of Review (original digest here)
Digest Updated: 7/99