In re the Claim of Guagliardo

27 A.D.3d 866, 810 N.Y.S.2d 557
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 9, 2006
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 27 A.D.3d 866 (In re the Claim of Guagliardo) 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 Guagliardo, 27 A.D.3d 866, 810 N.Y.S.2d 557 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 5, 2005, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct.

[867]*867Claimant worked as a driver for an automotive parts store. After he refused his employer’s repeated requests to sign a document acknowledging his receipt of updated pages of the employee handbook, he was discharged from his position. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board found that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his job due to misconduct. Claimant appeals.

We affirm. An employee’s failure to comply with an employer’s reasonable request may constitute insubordination rising to the level of disqualifying misconduct (see Matter of Tunne [Commissioner of Labor], 21 AD3d 1194, 1195 [2005]; Matter of Francano [Commissioner of Labor], 12 AD3d 768, 768 [2004]). Here, claimant admittedly refused to sign the acknowledgment and the only explanation he offered was that he did not have to sign the acknowledgment in order to retain his employment. Inasmuch as the employer’s request was reasonable and claimant did not put forth a compelling reason for failing to comply with it, we find no basis for disturbing the Board’s decision.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, 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

Related

MatterofJackson[Commr.ofLabor]
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014
In re the Claim of Jackson
120 A.D.3d 1503 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
In re Bull
116 A.D.3d 1325 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
In re Ortiz
97 A.D.3d 885 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
In re the Claim of Tosca
81 A.D.3d 1061 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
In re the Claim of Smith
68 A.D.3d 1431 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re the Claim of Simkhayeva
65 A.D.3d 1415 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re the Claim of Atson
64 A.D.3d 1065 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re the Claim of Box
50 A.D.3d 1431 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
In re the Claim of Miner
49 A.D.3d 1128 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
In re the Claim of Lambert
34 A.D.3d 948 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
In re the Claim of Benbow
32 A.D.3d 1094 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
27 A.D.3d 866, 810 N.Y.S.2d 557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-guagliardo-nyappdiv-2006.