In re the Claim of Hawana

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Hawana

285 A.D.2d 800, 729 N.Y.S.2d 794, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7425

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

DecidedJuly 12, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 285 A.D.2d 800 (In re the Claim of Hawana) 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 Hawana, 285 A.D.2d 800, 729 N.Y.S.2d 794, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7425 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 28, 2000, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was discharged from his employment as a caseworker with the New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services for harassing and threatening his supervisor. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he was terminated due to misconduct. The record indicates that claimant, among other acts of misconduct, [801]*801threatened, his supervisor on numerous occasions and discussed with a co-worker his anger toward his supervisor and made threats toward the supervisor in the co-worker’s presence. It is well settled that threatening one’s supervisor can constitute misconduct (see, Matter of Pabon [Commissioner of Labor], 271 AD2d 800; Matter of Castro [Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 909). Although claimant denies that he made any threatening remarks, the contrary testimony of his supervisor and coworker presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Pabon [Commissioner of Labor], supra).

Mercure, J. P., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, 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 November 28, 2000, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was discharged from his employment as a caseworker with the New York City Department of Citywide Administrative Services for harassing and threatening his supervisor. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he was terminated due to misconduct. The record indicates that claimant, among other acts of misconduct, [801]*801threatened, his supervisor on numerous occasions and discussed with a co-worker his anger toward his supervisor and made threats toward the supervisor in the co-worker’s presence. It is well settled that threatening one’s supervisor can constitute misconduct (see, Matter of Pabon [Commissioner of Labor], 271 AD2d 800; Matter of Castro [Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 909). Although claimant denies that he made any threatening remarks, the contrary testimony of his supervisor and coworker presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Pabon [Commissioner of Labor], supra).

Mercure, J. P., Peters, Spain, Mugglin and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D.2d 800, 729 N.Y.S.2d 794, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-hawana-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack