Berry, Whitson & Berry v. Division of Employment Sec., Dept. of Labor and Industry, A--88

• Court: United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
• Citation: 21 N.J. 73,120 A.2d 742
• Docket Number: No. A--88,A--88
• Parties: BERRY, WHITSON & BERRY, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY, State of New Jersey, and Board of Review, Respondents.
• Decision Date: 20 February 1956

Page 73

21 N.J. 73

120 A.2d 742

BERRY, WHITSON & BERRY, Appellant, v. DIVISION OF EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY, State of New Jersey, and Board of

Review, Respondents.

No. A--88.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued Jan. 30, 1956.

Decided Feb. 20, 1956.

Henry H. Wiley, Toms River, for appellant (Berry, Whitson & Berry, Toms River, attorneys).

Clarence F. McGovern, Trenton, for respondents.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, Jr., J.

This appeal was certified here of our own motion while pending in the Appellate Division.

The husband of Mrs. Glynis S. Dexter, serving in the United States Navy, was stationed at the Lakehurst Naval Air Station. Mrs. Dexter, aged 22, lived with him at Lakehurst and worked for appellant at Toms River, several miles away, traveling to and from work in the couple's car. She quit her job and went to her parents' home in Maine when her husband was transferred to Kansas for eight weeks' schooling there. She diligently, but unsuccessfully, sought new employment in Maine, and then filed a claim for unemployment compensation benefits.

The issue for decision is whether Mrs. Dexter 'left work voluntarily without good cause' so as to be disqualified for benefits, as provided by R.S. 43:21--5(a), N.J.S.A.

The Board of Review determined that 'The claimant left her work in New Jersey voluntarily but with good cause. No disqualification exists.'

The test of 'good cause' is found in our opinion in Krauss v. A. & M. Karagheusian, Inc., 13 N.J. 447, 464--465, 100 A.2d 277, 286 (1953), where we said:

'What is 'good cause' must reflect the underlying purpose of the act to relieve against the distress of involuntary unemployment. The seeming paradox of allowing benefits to an individual whose unemployment is of his own volition disappears when the context of the words is viewed in that light. The Legislature contemplated that when an individual voluntarily leaves a job under the pressure of circumstances which may reasonably be viewed as having compelled him to do so, the termination of his employment is involuntary for the purposes of the act. In statutory contemplation he cannot then reasonably be judged as free to stay at the job. Unlike the statutes of some states, the New Jersey act does not require that 'good cause' be 'connected with the work' or 'attributable to the work.' Therefore, 'good cause' may also lie in extraneous factors exerting compulsive pressure upon the claimant and causing him to quit. The test is well stated in Bliley Electric Co. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review (158 Pa.Super. 548) 45 A.2d (898) 903:

"* * * The mere fact that a worker wills and intends to leave a job does not necessarily and always mean that the leaving is voluntary. Extraneous factors, the surrounding circumstances, must be taken into the account, and when they are examined it may be found that the seemingly voluntary, the apparently intentional, act was in fact involuntary. A worker's physical and mental condition, his personal and family problems, the authoritative demand of legal duties--these are circumstances that exert pressure upon him and imperiously call for decision and action.

"When therefore the pressure of real not imaginary, substantial not trifling, reasonable not whimsical, circumstances Compel the decision to leave employment, the decision is voluntary in the sense that the worker has willed it, but involuntary because outward pressures have compelled it. Or to state it differently, if a worker leaves his employment when he is compelled to do so by necessitous circumstances or because of legal or family obligations, his leaving is voluntary with good cause, and under the act he is entitled to benefits. The pressure of necessity, of legal duty, or family obligations, or other overpowering circumstances and his capitulation to them transform what is ostensibly voluntary unemployment into involuntary unemployment."

Mrs. Dexter's parents live in the vicinity of Brunswick, Maine, where there is also a Naval Air Station. When appellant hired Mrs. Dexter it was admittedly with the knowledge that she 'would stay with us as long as her husband stayed down in this area,' but would leave if ...