In re Claim of Ciallela

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Claim of Ciallela

172 A.D.2d 888, 567 N.Y.S.2d 952, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4206

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 4, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 172 A.D.2d 888 (In re Claim of Ciallela) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Claim of Ciallela, 172 A.D.2d 888, 567 N.Y.S.2d 952, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4206 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 13, 1989, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The evidence establishes that claimant, a nurse’s aide, had previously been told that she needed to be more careful in speaking to patients. The incident that culminated in her termination was her use of foul language toward a particular patient. Although claimant denied the use of such language, that merely presented a question of credibility which was within the exclusive province of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Padilla [Sephardic Home for the Aged—Roberts], 113 AD2d 997). The record also reveals that claimant had been furnished with the employer’s policy precluding the use of such language. The policy further provided that any disruption in patient care could result in an employee’s discharge. Under the circumstances, there is sub[889]*889stantial evidence in the record to support the decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to misconduct (see, Matter of Valentin [American Museum of Natural History—Roberts], 103 AD2d 919).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 13, 1989, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The evidence establishes that claimant, a nurse’s aide, had previously been told that she needed to be more careful in speaking to patients. The incident that culminated in her termination was her use of foul language toward a particular patient. Although claimant denied the use of such language, that merely presented a question of credibility which was within the exclusive province of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve (see, Matter of Padilla [Sephardic Home for the Aged—Roberts], 113 AD2d 997). The record also reveals that claimant had been furnished with the employer’s policy precluding the use of such language. The policy further provided that any disruption in patient care could result in an employee’s discharge. Under the circumstances, there is sub[889]*889stantial evidence in the record to support the decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to misconduct (see, Matter of Valentin [American Museum of Natural History—Roberts], 103 AD2d 919).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 A.D.2d 888, 567 N.Y.S.2d 952, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-claim-of-ciallela-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack