In re the Claim of Garcia

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Garcia

246 A.D.2d 697, 667 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 80

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 246 A.D.2d 697 (In re the Claim of Garcia) 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 Garcia, 246 A.D.2d 697, 667 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 80 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemploy[698]*698ment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 14, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a maintenance worker at a clinic for recovering drug addicts, where every weekday methadone mixed with orange juice was dispensed to approximately 600 individuals. On Friday mornings, it was claimant’s job to take out the trash bags containing the used cups and empty methadone bottles and to watch over them until they were picked up by the sanitation truck in order to prevent them from falling into the hands of drug addicts or drug dealers. Claimant was fired after he took out the trash one Thursday afternoon, leaving it unattended until it was picked up the next morning. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct. We affirm. Evidence presented at the hearing disclosed that claimant knowingly violated an established workplace rule, an infraction which may constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Imondi [North Fork Bank—Sweeney], 233 AD2d 736, 737; Matter of O’Shea [Sweeney], 233 AD2d 736).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., 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 Unemploy[698]*698ment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 14, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a maintenance worker at a clinic for recovering drug addicts, where every weekday methadone mixed with orange juice was dispensed to approximately 600 individuals. On Friday mornings, it was claimant’s job to take out the trash bags containing the used cups and empty methadone bottles and to watch over them until they were picked up by the sanitation truck in order to prevent them from falling into the hands of drug addicts or drug dealers. Claimant was fired after he took out the trash one Thursday afternoon, leaving it unattended until it was picked up the next morning. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct. We affirm. Evidence presented at the hearing disclosed that claimant knowingly violated an established workplace rule, an infraction which may constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Imondi [North Fork Bank—Sweeney], 233 AD2d 736, 737; Matter of O’Shea [Sweeney], 233 AD2d 736).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D.2d 697, 667 N.Y.S.2d 475, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 80, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-garcia-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack