In re the Claim of De Scetto

51 A.D.2d 1100, 381 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11960
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 25, 1976·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 17, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits. Claimant, a clothing salesman in a retail store, had been warned on April 14 that he would be discharged if his attendance did not improve by June 1. From April 14 to June 2 claimant reported late for work 22 times. He was thereupon discharged. Claimant conceded that his starting time was 9:30 a.m. and admitted that he consistently failed to report to work until 9:45 a.m., allegedly because he had no work to do until then. Claimant’s conduct following the warning in regard to lateness constituted misconduct in connection with his employment (Matter of Greene [Levine] 48 AD2d 747). There is substantial evidence in this record to support the board’s determination (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Roth [Catherwood] 34 AD2d 1081). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Mahoney, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re the Claim of De Scetto, 51 A.D.2d 1100, 381 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11960 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

51 A.D.2d 1100 (In re the Claim of De Scetto) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re the Claim of Moscicki
196 A.D.2d 920 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
Sanchez v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, ETC.
411 So. 2d 313 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)