In re the Claim of Cohen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Cohen

255 A.D.2d 862, 681 N.Y.S.2d 370, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12816

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

DecidedNovember 25, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 255 A.D.2d 862 (In re the Claim of Cohen) 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 Cohen, 255 A.D.2d 862, 681 N.Y.S.2d 370, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12816 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 20, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a warehouse worker for a wine and spirits wholesaler when he was terminated for failing to perform a work assignment. Claimant testified that he forgot about the assignment after he became involved in a lengthy conversation with a co-worker about video games. Several weeks earlier, claimant had been fired for failing to carry out an assignment and walking away from his supervisor when questioned; however, claimant pleaded for another chance that time and was reinstated. Employee behavior that is detrimental to the employer’s interest and persists despite repeated warnings may be construed as disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Depena [Commissioner of Labor], 249 AD2d 611). Upon review of the record, we find substantial evidence to support the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s ruling that [863]*863claimant lost his employment under disqualifying circumstances.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, 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 October 20, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a warehouse worker for a wine and spirits wholesaler when he was terminated for failing to perform a work assignment. Claimant testified that he forgot about the assignment after he became involved in a lengthy conversation with a co-worker about video games. Several weeks earlier, claimant had been fired for failing to carry out an assignment and walking away from his supervisor when questioned; however, claimant pleaded for another chance that time and was reinstated. Employee behavior that is detrimental to the employer’s interest and persists despite repeated warnings may be construed as disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Depena [Commissioner of Labor], 249 AD2d 611). Upon review of the record, we find substantial evidence to support the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s ruling that [863]*863claimant lost his employment under disqualifying circumstances.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 A.D.2d 862, 681 N.Y.S.2d 370, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12816, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-cohen-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack