In re the Claim of Prior

254 A.D.2d 669, 679 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11487
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 29, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 254 A.D.2d 669 (In re the Claim of Prior) 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 Prior, 254 A.D.2d 669, 679 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11487 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 22, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, a clerk at a university medical center, signed an agreement consenting to a one-year term of probation in lieu of being discharged for excessive absences. The agreement provided, inter alia, that claimant would be terminated without further recourse if she failed to provide bona fide documentation for all future absences or violated any of the employer’s rules, including the rule requiring claimant to directly notify her supervisor if she intended on being absent. Thereafter, claimant was terminated when she was absent for four consecutive days without directly contacting her supervisor or providing him with the medical documentation that she had obtained. [670]*670Inasmuch as claimant violated the reasonable terms of her agreement with knowledge that such conduct would result in her termination, we find that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct (see, e.g., Matter of Downey [Commissioner of Labor], 252 AD2d 708; Matter of Foldes [Sweeney], 241 AD2d 742). We have reviewed claimant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Graffeo, 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 Duncan
283 A.D.2d 828 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
In re the Claim of Sadowski
268 A.D.2d 752 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Huntt
258 A.D.2d 760 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
254 A.D.2d 669, 679 N.Y.S.2d 200, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11487, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-prior-nyappdiv-1998.