In re the Claim of Maher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Maher

178 A.D.2d 739, 577 N.Y.S.2d 176, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16048

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 5, 1991·Published

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment [740] Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 18, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant lost his job of six years due to excessive tardiness. Prior to claimant’s discharge, his employer followed company policy with respect to warning him and ultimately docking his pay because of his tardiness. Although claimant admitted that he knew that his job was in jeopardy, he made no attempt to change his daily routine to avoid being late. Under the circumstances, there is substantial evidence to support the decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to misconduct (see, Matter of Grosso [Levine], 52 AD2d 964; Matter of De Scetto [Levine], 51 AD2d 1100).

Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Mercure and Harvey, 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 [740] Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 18, 1990, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant lost his job of six years due to excessive tardiness. Prior to claimant’s discharge, his employer followed company policy with respect to warning him and ultimately docking his pay because of his tardiness. Although claimant admitted that he knew that his job was in jeopardy, he made no attempt to change his daily routine to avoid being late. Under the circumstances, there is substantial evidence to support the decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits due to misconduct (see, Matter of Grosso [Levine], 52 AD2d 964; Matter of De Scetto [Levine], 51 AD2d 1100).

Mahoney, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of Maher, 178 A.D.2d 739, 577 N.Y.S.2d 176, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 16048 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

178 A.D.2d 739 (In re the Claim of Maher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related