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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 22, 1996·Published·Cited by 4 cases

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.

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

224 A.D.2d 851 (In re the Claim of Keast) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related