In re the Claim of Halt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Halt

243 A.D.2d 805, 665 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9676

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

DecidedOctober 9, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 243 A.D.2d 805 (In re the Claim of Halt) 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 Halt, 243 A.D.2d 805, 665 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9676 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 27, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was discharged from his employment after he was involved in a confrontation in which he swore at a site supervisor and kicked boxes. Claimant’s actions violated company rules prohibiting employees from engaging in such conduct. Following his discharge, claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits, claiming that he had lost his employment due to lack of work. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision which ruled, inter alia, that claimant’s conduct was insubordinate and constituted disqualifying misconduct and that he had made willful false statements to obtain benefits. An employee’s failure to comply with established company rules has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Keast [Essex County ARC—Sweeney], 224 AD2d 851). Although claimant’s version of the facts conflicted with that of the employer’s representative, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Derian [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 722]. We accordingly affirm.

Mikoll, J. P., White, Casey, Peters and Spain, 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 December 27, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was discharged from his employment after he was involved in a confrontation in which he swore at a site supervisor and kicked boxes. Claimant’s actions violated company rules prohibiting employees from engaging in such conduct. Following his discharge, claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits, claiming that he had lost his employment due to lack of work. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision which ruled, inter alia, that claimant’s conduct was insubordinate and constituted disqualifying misconduct and that he had made willful false statements to obtain benefits. An employee’s failure to comply with established company rules has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Keast [Essex County ARC—Sweeney], 224 AD2d 851). Although claimant’s version of the facts conflicted with that of the employer’s representative, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Derian [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 722]. We accordingly affirm.

Mikoll, J. P., White, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

243 A.D.2d 805, 665 N.Y.S.2d 333, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-halt-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack