Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits on the ground that without good cause he voluntarily left his employment of 17 1/2 years duration by a large law firm, at a salary of $13,000 per year, reached by progressive increases from an initial salary not disclosed by the evidence. In the signed summary of his interview, claimant stated as his reason for leaving: "I was doing the work of a full member of the firm with the associated responsibilities. However, since there was no chance to become a partner in the firm, I decided after much thought to leave and try to find a more suitable position." Noting the "subjective" nature of a professional partnership, involving many factors, including economics, personalities, compatability and human behavior, the board held that there was no "inherent right sans agreement to be promoted to a partnership" and thus no "justiciable issue". The board expressly found "that the true reason for claimant's leaving was his dissatisfaction in not being promoted to a partnership with an attendant increase in earnings." We perceive no basis upon which we might disturb this factual determination, related to the board's conclusion that such circumstances do not constitute good cause, or the finding, equally within the board's province, that there was no "persuasive evidence" as to "prevailing wages for lawyers of claimant's standing". Further, as respects compensation, appellant's brief, in construing the testimony, states that appellant "indicated" that he would not have remained had his salary been increased. Additionally, the board properly found that no circumstances "developed in the course of [the] employment" that would have justified refusal thereof in the first instance. (Labor Law, § 593, subd. 1, par. [a]; Matter of Sellers [ J.W. Mays, Inc. — Catherwood], 13 A.D.2d 204.) Decision affirmed, without costs.