In re the Claim of Greer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Greer

257 A.D.2d 944, 684 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 781

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

DecidedJanuary 28, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 257 A.D.2d 944 (In re the Claim of Greer) 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 Greer, 257 A.D.2d 944, 684 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 781 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 22, 1998, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because bis employment was terminated due to misconduct.

[945]*945Claimant was discharged from his employment after failing to timely contact the employer regarding his absence from work due to his arrest on May 13, 1997. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits. Claimant was aware of the employer’s policy to report any absences but made no attempt to contact the employer until after 6:00 p.m. on May 19, 1997 and thereafter by letter on May 20, 1997. Although claimant testified that he had restricted access to the telephone while incarcerated, he admitted to being able to contact his family and attorney during this period. Under these circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision (see generally, Matter of Tensley [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 711; cf., Matter of Benjamin [Hartnett], 175 AD2d 936). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Graffeo, 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 January 22, 1998, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because bis employment was terminated due to misconduct.

[945]*945Claimant was discharged from his employment after failing to timely contact the employer regarding his absence from work due to his arrest on May 13, 1997. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits. Claimant was aware of the employer’s policy to report any absences but made no attempt to contact the employer until after 6:00 p.m. on May 19, 1997 and thereafter by letter on May 20, 1997. Although claimant testified that he had restricted access to the telephone while incarcerated, he admitted to being able to contact his family and attorney during this period. Under these circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision (see generally, Matter of Tensley [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 711; cf., Matter of Benjamin [Hartnett], 175 AD2d 936). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Graffeo, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

257 A.D.2d 944, 684 N.Y.S.2d 348, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-greer-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack