In re the Claim of Hassenfratz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Hassenfratz

242 A.D.2d 815, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1023, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8677

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

DecidedSeptember 11, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 242 A.D.2d 815 (In re the Claim of Hassenfratz) 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 Hassenfratz, 242 A.D.2d 815, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1023, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8677 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 7, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, employed as a delivery truck driver, was fired for making a vulgar and abusive comment to a female employee. Hearing testimony disclosed that claimant had been notified that such conduct was counter to both the employer’s policy and the terms of his union’s collective bargaining agreement. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant had lost his employment under disqualifying circumstances. We affirm. An employee’s knowing violation of a company rule or policy has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Shay [Eastern Alloys—Hudacs], 192 AD2d 1043) as has the use of offensive language in the workplace (see, Matter of Weiss [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 672). Claimant’s comment was both offensive and against his employer’s well-established policy. The ruling of disqualification is, accordingly, affirmed.

[816]*816Mikoll, J. P., Her cure, White, Casey 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 May 7, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, employed as a delivery truck driver, was fired for making a vulgar and abusive comment to a female employee. Hearing testimony disclosed that claimant had been notified that such conduct was counter to both the employer’s policy and the terms of his union’s collective bargaining agreement. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant had lost his employment under disqualifying circumstances. We affirm. An employee’s knowing violation of a company rule or policy has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Shay [Eastern Alloys—Hudacs], 192 AD2d 1043) as has the use of offensive language in the workplace (see, Matter of Weiss [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 672). Claimant’s comment was both offensive and against his employer’s well-established policy. The ruling of disqualification is, accordingly, affirmed.

[816]*816Mikoll, J. P., Her cure, White, Casey and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

242 A.D.2d 815, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1023, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8677, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-hassenfratz-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack