In re the Claim of Love

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Love

249 A.D.2d 674, 670 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891

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

DecidedApril 9, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 249 A.D.2d 674 (In re the Claim of Love) 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 Love, 249 A.D.2d 674, 670 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 11, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was a laborer for the employer, a plywood manufacturer, until he was terminated for, inter alia, fighting with a co-worker. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision which ruled that claimant’s actions constituted misconduct under the Labor Law and that he was therefore disqualified from receiving benefits. Regardless of who initiated it, fighting with a co-worker during working hours may constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Rush [Sweeney], 244 AD2d 689; Matter of Marcus [Sweeney], 235 AD2d 886, 887; Matter of Perry [Sweeney], 222 AD2d 924). Claimant’s assertion that he acted in self-defense and appropriately under the circumstances presented a credibility is[675]*675sue which the Board could properly choose to resolve against him (see, Matter of Agis [Sweeney], 242 AD2d 819).

Mikoll, J. P., White, Peters, Spain and Carpinello, 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 April 11, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was a laborer for the employer, a plywood manufacturer, until he was terminated for, inter alia, fighting with a co-worker. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision which ruled that claimant’s actions constituted misconduct under the Labor Law and that he was therefore disqualified from receiving benefits. Regardless of who initiated it, fighting with a co-worker during working hours may constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Rush [Sweeney], 244 AD2d 689; Matter of Marcus [Sweeney], 235 AD2d 886, 887; Matter of Perry [Sweeney], 222 AD2d 924). Claimant’s assertion that he acted in self-defense and appropriately under the circumstances presented a credibility is[675]*675sue which the Board could properly choose to resolve against him (see, Matter of Agis [Sweeney], 242 AD2d 819).

Mikoll, J. P., White, Peters, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 674, 670 N.Y.S.2d 984, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-love-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack