WPC # VU:a % 0w@ 4    0J 0TW 0^ 0h 0rq 0| 0_ 0 1uu 0dU*NB)xDCU> AM"o Bv~3v D3 0@ AOF 0D  D/P BHP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLD,cAZ"Arial RegularX(~$  HTR[A' LegalLh (Avery 4167 Post CardA' Legalh (Avery 4167 Post CardTXmXXX73XXdXXd7 EPDӀڃ"3|xH2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d 7Border 1dd<  9p`(&Times New Roman-!C << G  !  #d#    H \RA'\#d#     YYY FILEDX October30,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk  dPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva %%%%'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! .     H \RA'\#Xd##Xd#  ""R#$!A1-j|` . `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ EASTERNSECTIONATKNOXVILLE MARCELLAJ.CHEEK  ) BRADLEYCHANCERY      ) Petitioner/Appellee  ) NO.03A019706CH00218      )v.      ) HON.EARLH.HENLEY̜      ) CHANCELLORMARGARETCULEPPER,  ) COMMISSIONEROF   )EMPLOYMENTSECURITYand )GALENINTERNALMEDICAL )GROUP,P.C.,    )      ) REVERSEDand Respondents/Appellants  ) REMANDEDCynthiaR.Freemon,Chattanooga,AttorneyforAppellantGalenInternalMedicalGroup,P.C.RandySellers,Cleveland,AttorneyforAppelleeMarcellaJ.Cheek. @ " OPINION       " INMAN,SeniorJudge TheAppealsTribunalandtheBoardofReviewheldthatthisappelleewasdisqualifiedtoreceiveunemploymentinsurancebenefitsbecauseshevoluntarilyquitherjobwithoutgoodcause.Judicialreviewwassoughtbytheappellee,andthedecisionoftheBoardofReviewwasreversedbytheChancellor,whofoundthat therewasnosubstantialevidencetosupportthefindingoffactthatthepetitionersshiftchangewastemporary.TheemployerappealsandpresentsforreviewtheproprietyofthereversalofthedecisionoftheBoardofReview.  ThesamestandardofreviewimposedontrialcourtsprevailsonthisCourt.Factualissuesarereviewedagainstastandardofsubstantialandmaterialevidence. T.C.A.507304(i)(2)provides:  8 (2)Thechancellormayaffirmthedecisionoftheboardorthechancellormayreverse,remandormodifythedecisioniftherightsofthepetitionerhavebeenprejudicedbecausetheadministrativefindings,inferences,conclusionsordecisionsare:8 8 (A)Inviolationofconstitutionalorstatutoryprovisions;8 8 (B)Inexcessofthestatutoryauthorityoftheagency;8 8 (C)Madeuponunlawfulprocedure;8 8 (D)Arbitraryorcapriciousorcharacterizedbyabuseofdiscretionorclearlyunwarrantedexerciseofdiscretion;or8 8 (E)Unsupportedbyevidencewhichisbothsubstantialandmaterialinthelightoftheentirerecord.8 (3)Indeterminingthesubstantialityofevidence,thechancellorshalltakeintoaccountwhateverintherecordfairlydetractsfromitsweight,butthechancellorshallnotsubstitutethechancellorsjudgmentforthatoftheboardofreviewastotheweightoftheevidenceonquestionsoffact.Nodecisionoftheboardshallbereversed,remandedormodifiedbythechancellorunlessforerrorswhichaffectthemeritsofthefinaldecisionoftheboard.Suchpetitionforcertiorariandtheattendantwrittheretoshallbeheardbythechancelloreitherattermtimeorvacationasamatterofright,anyotherstatuteofthisstatetothecontrarynotwithstanding.See:HumanaofTennesseev.TennesseeHealthFacilitiesCommission,etal.,551S.W.2d664(Tenn.1977);DePriestv.Puett,669S.W.2d669(Tenn.App.1984). @ THEEVIDENCE   TheappelleewasemployedasalaboratorytechnicianbyGalenInternalMedicalGroup.OnJanuary6,1995shewasinformedthatherworkhourswouldbechangedfromthefirsttothesecondshiftfortwoweeksatwhichtimetheemployerwouldattempttoaccommodateherwishestoremainonthefirstshift[i.e.,from7:00a.m.to3:00p.m.]sothatshemighthavethecompanyofhergrandchildrenandspendmoretimewithherhusband.Therewasadegreeofconflictingevidenceaboutthepermanencevisavistemporarynatureofthisarrangement,butinanyevent,theappelleequitvoluntarilythree(3)daysfollowingtheshiftchange. TheBoardofReviewconcludedthatthe [Petitioners]selfimposedrestrictionstoonlybeingavailablefor7:00a.m.to4:00p.m.donotestablishgoodcauseforleavingthejob.TheChancellordisagreed,findingthatthedecisionoftheBoardofReviewwasnotsupportedbysubstantialandmaterialevidence. WeareunabletoagreewiththeChancellor. Aclaimantwhoquitsemploymentisnot%  disqualifiedfromreceivingbenefitswhentheemployeehadgoodcauseconnectedtotheworkforleavingthejob.Thachv.Scott,410S.W.2d173(Tenn.1966).Itiswellsettledinthisjurisdictionthatapreferenceforparticularhoursofworkisnotagoodcausetorefuseorleavework.AladdinIndustries,Inc.v.Scott,407S.W.2d161(Tenn.1966);Fordv.Traughber,813S.W.2d141(Tenn.App.1991). Underwellsettledprinciples,wecannotfindthatthedecisionoftheBoardofReviewisunsupportedbymaterialandsubstantialevidence.ThejudgmentoftheChancelloristhereforereversed,withcostsassessedtotheappellee.      ________________________________      WilliamH.Inman,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:_____________________________̜HerschelP.Franks,Judge______________________________CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,Judge