In re the Claim of D'Arbasie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of D'Arbasie

169 A.D.2d 856, 564 N.Y.S.2d 584, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55

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

DecidedJanuary 3, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 169 A.D.2d 856 (In re the Claim of D'Arbasie) 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 D'Arbasie, 169 A.D.2d 856, 564 N.Y.S.2d 584, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 7, 1989, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The record supports the conclusion that claimant was guilty of insubordination in taking her timesheet from her supervisor’s desk in violation of the employer’s rules and in refusing to return it even after she was told to do so. Under the circumstances, the determination that her actions constituted misconduct is supported by substantial evidence and should be upheld (see, Matter of Valentin [American Museum of Natural History—Roberts], 103 AD2d 919). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and have been found to be lacking in merit.

[857]*857Decision affirmed, without costs. Casey, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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 July 7, 1989, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The record supports the conclusion that claimant was guilty of insubordination in taking her timesheet from her supervisor’s desk in violation of the employer’s rules and in refusing to return it even after she was told to do so. Under the circumstances, the determination that her actions constituted misconduct is supported by substantial evidence and should be upheld (see, Matter of Valentin [American Museum of Natural History—Roberts], 103 AD2d 919). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and have been found to be lacking in merit.

[857]*857Decision affirmed, without costs. Casey, J. P., Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A.D.2d 856, 564 N.Y.S.2d 584, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-darbasie-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack