In re the Claim of Cudia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Cudia

201 A.D.2d 817, 607 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1152

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 10, 1994·Published

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 14, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Upon review of the record, we find that there was substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination that claimant was discharged for misconduct from her position as a drug store cashier. Claimant was terminated for intentionally using a merchandise coupon to purchase an item different from that stated on the coupon in violation of the employer’s known policy against this practice. Significantly, the Board was free to disbelieve claimant’s explanation for her conduct and to credit the testimony of the employer’s witness.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Casey, Weiss and Yesawich Jr., 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 September 14, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Upon review of the record, we find that there was substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination that claimant was discharged for misconduct from her position as a drug store cashier. Claimant was terminated for intentionally using a merchandise coupon to purchase an item different from that stated on the coupon in violation of the employer’s known policy against this practice. Significantly, the Board was free to disbelieve claimant’s explanation for her conduct and to credit the testimony of the employer’s witness.

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

In re the Claim of Cudia, 201 A.D.2d 817, 607 N.Y.S.2d 492, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1152 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

201 A.D.2d 817 (In re the Claim of Cudia) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.