In re the Claim of Francis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Francis

80 A.D.2d 961

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

DecidedMarch 6, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 80 A.D.2d 961 (In re the Claim of Francis) 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 Francis, 80 A.D.2d 961 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinions

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 4, 1979, which affirmed a decision of an Administrative Law Judge overruling the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. There is no basis in the record to sustain the factual determination that claimant was sick and unable to work. The record contains substantial evidence that claimant was intoxicated on the job, brought liquor to work and caused disruption on the job. Such activities constitute misconduct sufficient to disqualify claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits (Matter of Rupp [Levine], 49 AD2d 783; Matter of Fahy [Catherwood], 29 AD2d 712; Matter of Poveda [Catherwood,], 28 AD2d 781). Decision reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. Mahoney, P. J., Main, Yesawich, Jr., and Weiss, 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 September 4, 1979, which affirmed a decision of an Administrative Law Judge overruling the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits because he lost his employment through misconduct in connection therewith. There is no basis in the record to sustain the factual determination that claimant was sick and unable to work. The record contains substantial evidence that claimant was intoxicated on the job, brought liquor to work and caused disruption on the job. Such activities constitute misconduct sufficient to disqualify claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits (Matter of Rupp [Levine], 49 AD2d 783; Matter of Fahy [Catherwood], 29 AD2d 712; Matter of Poveda [Catherwood,], 28 AD2d 781). Decision reversed, without costs, and matter remitted to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board for further proceedings not inconsistent herewith. Mahoney, P. J., Main, Yesawich, Jr., and Weiss, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.2d 961, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-francis-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack