In re the Claim of Keast

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Keast

224 A.D.2d 851, 638 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1314

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 224 A.D.2d 851 (In re the Claim of Keast) 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 Keast, 224 A.D.2d 851, 638 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1314 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 12, 1994, as amended by decision filed November 2, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was a resident counselor at Essex County ARC (hereinafter the employer). Claimant took three residents to Vermont to see a Christmas play. While returning from the trip, claimant stopped at a local mall to transact personal business, leaving the residents unattended in the van. Claimant was terminated for such actions and the Board denied her application for unemployment insurance benefits, finding that she was terminated for misconduct. Inasmuch as there is no dispute as to the circumstances leading to claimant’s termination and that her actions violated the employer’s policies prohibiting employees from leaving residents alone or attending to personal business during work hours, we find that this determination is supported by substantial evidence.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. 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 October 12, 1994, as amended by decision filed November 2, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was a resident counselor at Essex County ARC (hereinafter the employer). Claimant took three residents to Vermont to see a Christmas play. While returning from the trip, claimant stopped at a local mall to transact personal business, leaving the residents unattended in the van. Claimant was terminated for such actions and the Board denied her application for unemployment insurance benefits, finding that she was terminated for misconduct. Inasmuch as there is no dispute as to the circumstances leading to claimant’s termination and that her actions violated the employer’s policies prohibiting employees from leaving residents alone or attending to personal business during work hours, we find that this determination is supported by substantial evidence.

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 851, 638 N.Y.S.2d 201, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-keast-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack