MICHELE FREEMAN v. BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, et al.

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-5606-05T15606-05T1

MICHELE FREEMAN,

Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF REVIEW,

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, and

PATHMARK STORES, INC.

Respondents.

_____________________________________________________________

 

Submitted June 19, 2007 - Decided July 17, 2007

Before Judges Stern and Coburn.

On appeal from the Board of Review,

Department of Labor, 107,691.

John W. Spoganetz, attorney for appellant.

Stuart Rabner, Attorney General, attorney

for respondents (Lewis A. Scheindlin, Assistant

Attorney General, of counsel; Alan C. Stephens,

Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

In this unemployment compensation case, Michele Freeman appeals from a decision of the Board of Review, which affirmed a decision by the Appeal Tribunal, denying her benefits on the ground that she left work voluntarily without good cause attributable to the work. See N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(a).

The Appeal Tribunal determined that Freeman voluntarily retired on February 24, 2006, in response to her employer's December 9, 2005 offer of a retirement incentive. She was not advised that she would be laid off if she did not accept the retirement incentive.

On appeal to us, Freeman argues that the Board of Review, which accepted the determinations, erred because she offered substantial credible evidence in support of her claim. She also complains that the hearing examiner failed to follow the principles contained in N.J.A.C. 12:17-9.6.

After carefully reviewing the record and briefs, we are satisfied that the administrative decision is supported by substantial credible evidence on the record as a whole and that the arguments offered by Freeman are without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D) & (E). See, e.g., Brady v. Board of Review, 152 N.J. 197, 219 (1997)(an employee who resigns without demonstrating that he or she is in imminent danger of being terminated or laid off leaves work without good cause attributable to the work).

 
Affirmed.

(continued)

(continued)

2

A-5606-05T1

July 17, 2007