In re the Claim of Carr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Carr

253 A.D.2d 931, 678 N.Y.S.2d 152, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9342

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

DecidedSeptember 10, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 253 A.D.2d 931 (In re the Claim of Carr) 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 Carr, 253 A.D.2d 931, 678 N.Y.S.2d 152, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9342 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 12, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was discharged from his employment as a security guard for a building management company after he was found sleeping while working the midnight to 8:00 a.m. shift. Although claimant maintained that it was common practice to sleep, the record indicates that he had been warned on two prior occasions that such conduct was not acceptable. Given claimant’s admission that he was sleeping, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct (see, Matter of Dimassimo [Eastman Kodak Co.—Sweeney], 231 AD2d 777; Matter of Andrews [Hartnett], 176 AD2d 429).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Peters 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 June 12, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was discharged from his employment as a security guard for a building management company after he was found sleeping while working the midnight to 8:00 a.m. shift. Although claimant maintained that it was common practice to sleep, the record indicates that he had been warned on two prior occasions that such conduct was not acceptable. Given claimant’s admission that he was sleeping, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct (see, Matter of Dimassimo [Eastman Kodak Co.—Sweeney], 231 AD2d 777; Matter of Andrews [Hartnett], 176 AD2d 429).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

253 A.D.2d 931, 678 N.Y.S.2d 152, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-carr-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack