In re the Claim of Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Brown

243 A.D.2d 808, 665 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9688

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 9, 1997·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 20, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

We affirm the ruling that claimant lost her employment as a merchandising coordinator due to disqualifying misconduct. Claimant’s termination arose out of certain telephone conversations initiated by her supervisor wherein he informed claimant that he had prepared a letter of reprimand concerning her previous unauthorized early departure from work. In response, claimant told her supervisor that he was being “asinine” and [809] hung up on him. Claimant refused to take the supervisor’s subsequent telephone call, as the result of which her employment was terminated. An employee’s refusal to comply with a supervisor’s reasonable request, such as that he or she acknowledge a critical performance evaluation, has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Talyansky [Magna Prods. Corp.—Sweeney], 236 AD2d 728) as has an employee’s disrespectful conduct toward a supervisor (see, Matter of Schneider [Garden City Union Free School Dist.—Hudacs], 201 AD2d 811). Substantial evidence supports the finding that claimant lost her employment under such disqualifying circumstances.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, 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 February 20, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

We affirm the ruling that claimant lost her employment as a merchandising coordinator due to disqualifying misconduct. Claimant’s termination arose out of certain telephone conversations initiated by her supervisor wherein he informed claimant that he had prepared a letter of reprimand concerning her previous unauthorized early departure from work. In response, claimant told her supervisor that he was being “asinine” and [809] hung up on him. Claimant refused to take the supervisor’s subsequent telephone call, as the result of which her employment was terminated. An employee’s refusal to comply with a supervisor’s reasonable request, such as that he or she acknowledge a critical performance evaluation, has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Talyansky [Magna Prods. Corp.—Sweeney], 236 AD2d 728) as has an employee’s disrespectful conduct toward a supervisor (see, Matter of Schneider [Garden City Union Free School Dist.—Hudacs], 201 AD2d 811). Substantial evidence supports the finding that claimant lost her employment under such disqualifying circumstances.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of Brown, 243 A.D.2d 808, 665 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9688 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

243 A.D.2d 808 (In re the Claim of Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related