In re the Claim of Lugo

251 A.D.2d 742, 673 N.Y.S.2d 772, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6489
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 4, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 742 (In re the Claim of Lugo) 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 Lugo, 251 A.D.2d 742, 673 N.Y.S.2d 772, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6489 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 28, 1997, 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 security guard for consuming alcohol during his lunch hour, having received prior warnings to refrain from such conduct. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, reversing the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter ALJ), ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits on the basis that he lost his employment due to misconduct. We affirm. Consuming alcohol while on the job has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Daly [Sweeney], 244 AD2d 614, 615). Given claimant’s admission that he consumed alcohol during lunch on the day in question and the testimony of co-workers that after lunch claimant’s words were slurred, he could not keep his balance and he was talking loudly, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. While considerable weight is accorded to the [743]*743credibility determinations of the ALJ, the Board is not bound thereby and is entitled to resolve issues of credibility differently than the ALJ (see, Matter of Di Donato [Hartnett], 176 AD2d 1102, 1103). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III 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

Related

In re the Claim of Dickson
6 A.D.3d 1022 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
In re the Claim of Cooney
283 A.D.2d 820 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
In re the Claim of Stearns
268 A.D.2d 855 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Sheehan
268 A.D.2d 856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Fishman
268 A.D.2d 651 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Keane
261 A.D.2d 764 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
In re the Claim of Phillips
257 A.D.2d 867 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
In re the Claim of Guibert
254 A.D.2d 661 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
In re the Claim of Palmitesso
253 A.D.2d 976 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
251 A.D.2d 742, 673 N.Y.S.2d 772, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-lugo-nyappdiv-1998.