In re the Claim of Naraine

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Naraine

245 A.D.2d 932, 666 N.Y.S.2d 844, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13589

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

DecidedDecember 24, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 245 A.D.2d 932 (In re the Claim of Naraine) 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 Naraine, 245 A.D.2d 932, 666 N.Y.S.2d 844, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13589 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 24, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a customer service representative for a retail store until she was terminated for violating the employer’s cash-handling procedure. Claimant acknowledged that she had received a copy of the employer’s cash-handling policy and procedure, which stated that an employee’s failure [933]*933to comply therewith would result in disciplinary action, including termination. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant lost her job under disqualifying circumstances. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. Failure to comply with an employer’s established policies or procedures has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Rothman [Sweeney], 242 AD2d 818; Matter of O’Shea [Sweeney], 233 AD2d 736). Claimant’s exculpatory explanation for the incident which caused her discharge raised a credibility issue which the Board was free to resolve against her (see, Matter of Perkov [Sweeney], 231 AD2d 780; Matter of Johnson [Ross], 81 AD2d 681, 682).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Yesawich Jr., 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 February 24, 1997, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a customer service representative for a retail store until she was terminated for violating the employer’s cash-handling procedure. Claimant acknowledged that she had received a copy of the employer’s cash-handling policy and procedure, which stated that an employee’s failure [933]*933to comply therewith would result in disciplinary action, including termination. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant lost her job under disqualifying circumstances. Substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. Failure to comply with an employer’s established policies or procedures has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Rothman [Sweeney], 242 AD2d 818; Matter of O’Shea [Sweeney], 233 AD2d 736). Claimant’s exculpatory explanation for the incident which caused her discharge raised a credibility issue which the Board was free to resolve against her (see, Matter of Perkov [Sweeney], 231 AD2d 780; Matter of Johnson [Ross], 81 AD2d 681, 682).

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 932, 666 N.Y.S.2d 844, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-naraine-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack