In re the Claim of Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Brown

176 A.D.2d 425, 574 N.Y.S.2d 415, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12414

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

DecidedSeptember 26, 1991

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 176 A.D.2d 425 (In re the Claim of Brown) 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 the Claim of Brown, 176 A.D.2d 425, 574 N.Y.S.2d 415, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12414 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 25, 1991, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

There is substantial evidence in the record to support the [426]*426conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant’s late return from lunch, though only by a few minutes, constituted misconduct (see, Matter of Estrada [Levine], 49 AD2d 774). During the approximately 10 months that claimant worked for his employer he was absent from work numerous times. His probationary period was extended and he was warned that any future unexcused absences or latenesses would result in his employment being terminated. Continued lateness after adequate warnings has been held to constitute misconduct which bars receipt of unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Grosso [Levine], 52 AD2d 964; Matter of Asselin [Levine], 50 AD2d 999).

Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr. and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

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 January 25, 1991, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

There is substantial evidence in the record to support the [426]*426conclusion by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant’s late return from lunch, though only by a few minutes, constituted misconduct (see, Matter of Estrada [Levine], 49 AD2d 774). During the approximately 10 months that claimant worked for his employer he was absent from work numerous times. His probationary period was extended and he was warned that any future unexcused absences or latenesses would result in his employment being terminated. Continued lateness after adequate warnings has been held to constitute misconduct which bars receipt of unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Grosso [Levine], 52 AD2d 964; Matter of Asselin [Levine], 50 AD2d 999).

Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr. and Mercure, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

176 A.D.2d 425, 574 N.Y.S.2d 415, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12414, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-brown-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack