In re the Claim of Patrick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Patrick

251 A.D.2d 944, 674 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7765

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

DecidedJune 25, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 944 (In re the Claim of Patrick) 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 Patrick, 251 A.D.2d 944, 674 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7765 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 6, 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 child care worker at a residential-treatment facility for troubled adolescents when he left his work station prior to the end of his shift without authorization, despite having received a prior warning that such conduct was unacceptable. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he was terminated due to misconduct. We affirm. It has been held that leaving work early without authorization can constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Elewa [Commissioner of Labor], 249 AD2d 618; Matter of Foster [Sweeney], 244 AD2d 628). Although claimant asserts that he had permission to leave work early, his supervisor’s contrary testimony created a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Foster [Sweeney], supra). Accordingly, we conclude that the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, 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 June 6, 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 child care worker at a residential-treatment facility for troubled adolescents when he left his work station prior to the end of his shift without authorization, despite having received a prior warning that such conduct was unacceptable. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he was terminated due to misconduct. We affirm. It has been held that leaving work early without authorization can constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Elewa [Commissioner of Labor], 249 AD2d 618; Matter of Foster [Sweeney], 244 AD2d 628). Although claimant asserts that he had permission to leave work early, his supervisor’s contrary testimony created a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Foster [Sweeney], supra). Accordingly, we conclude that the Board’s decision is supported by substantial evidence.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 944, 674 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7765, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-patrick-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack