In re the Claim of Jones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Jones

307 A.D.2d 582, 762 N.Y.S.2d 310, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8191

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

DecidedJuly 17, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 307 A.D.2d 582 (In re the Claim of Jones) 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 Jones, 307 A.D.2d 582, 762 N.Y.S.2d 310, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8191 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 9, 2002, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed by a temporary placement agency and was assigned work as a clerk for a hospital. Notwithstanding prior warnings regarding the employer’s call-in policy on other assignments, claimant failed to notify the employer or the hospital of two unauthorized absences. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant lost her employment due to misconduct. It is well settled that unauthorized absences from work, after having received prior warnings, constitutes misconduct (see Matter of Maxwell [Nigro Cos. — Commissioner of Labor], 305 AD2d 954 [2003]; Matter of Hughes [Commissioner of Labor], 283 AD2d 753 [2001]; Matter of Sadowski [Star Corrugated Box Co. — Commissioner of Labor], 268 AD2d 752 [2000]). The conflicting testimony as to whether claimant notified the hospital of her absence presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see Matter of Greene [Commissioner of Labor], 252 AD2d 622 [1998]).

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, 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 9, 2002, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed by a temporary placement agency and was assigned work as a clerk for a hospital. Notwithstanding prior warnings regarding the employer’s call-in policy on other assignments, claimant failed to notify the employer or the hospital of two unauthorized absences. Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant lost her employment due to misconduct. It is well settled that unauthorized absences from work, after having received prior warnings, constitutes misconduct (see Matter of Maxwell [Nigro Cos. — Commissioner of Labor], 305 AD2d 954 [2003]; Matter of Hughes [Commissioner of Labor], 283 AD2d 753 [2001]; Matter of Sadowski [Star Corrugated Box Co. — Commissioner of Labor], 268 AD2d 752 [2000]). The conflicting testimony as to whether claimant notified the hospital of her absence presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see Matter of Greene [Commissioner of Labor], 252 AD2d 622 [1998]).

Crew III, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

307 A.D.2d 582, 762 N.Y.S.2d 310, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-jones-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack