In re the Claim of Egelberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Egelberg

244 A.D.2d 684, 664 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11477

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 684 (In re the Claim of Egelberg) 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 Egelberg, 244 A.D.2d 684, 664 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11477 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 30, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, am instructor at the American Language Institute at New York University, failed to report for her first week of assigned teaching in January 1996 and was discharged for violating the employer’s policy which required instructors to inform the employer of any intended absences and/or substitute arrangements. Despite being aware of this policy, claimant arranged for a substitute to cover her classes well over a month before classes were scheduled to begin, yet failed to so inform her employer. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s ruling that claimant lost her employment under disqualifying circumstances. An employee’s knowing violation of an employer’s established policies and procedures has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Rothman [Sweeney], 242 AD2d 818; Matter of Derian [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 722).

Cardona, P. J., Yesawich Jr., Peters, 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 July 30, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, am instructor at the American Language Institute at New York University, failed to report for her first week of assigned teaching in January 1996 and was discharged for violating the employer’s policy which required instructors to inform the employer of any intended absences and/or substitute arrangements. Despite being aware of this policy, claimant arranged for a substitute to cover her classes well over a month before classes were scheduled to begin, yet failed to so inform her employer. We conclude that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s ruling that claimant lost her employment under disqualifying circumstances. An employee’s knowing violation of an employer’s established policies and procedures has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Rothman [Sweeney], 242 AD2d 818; Matter of Derian [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 722).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 684, 664 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-egelberg-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack