In re the Claim of MacGilfrey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of MacGilfrey

223 A.D.2d 894, 636 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 379

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 18, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 16, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, a cashier at a supermarket, was terminated from her employment for uttering obscene language to her manager after he spoke with her about her inability to get along with another cashier. Although claimant denied using obscene language, a representative of the employer testified that claimant used profanity toward her manager after he warned her about arguing with the other cashier in front of customers. In view of this, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision that claimant was terminated for misconduct. Accordingly, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and White, 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 August 16, 1994, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, a cashier at a supermarket, was terminated from her employment for uttering obscene language to her manager after he spoke with her about her inability to get along with another cashier. Although claimant denied using obscene language, a representative of the employer testified that claimant used profanity toward her manager after he warned her about arguing with the other cashier in front of customers. In view of this, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision that claimant was terminated for misconduct. Accordingly, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, Crew III and White, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of MacGilfrey, 223 A.D.2d 894, 636 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 379 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

223 A.D.2d 894 (In re the Claim of MacGilfrey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related