In re the Claim of Quinones

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Quinones

199 A.D.2d 807, 605 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12214

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

DecidedDecember 23, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 199 A.D.2d 807 (In re the Claim of Quinones) 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 Quinones, 199 A.D.2d 807, 605 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12214 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 26, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Following an argument between claimant and her supervi[808]*808sor, claimant was suspended for one week. At the hearing, however, claimant admitted that her supervisor told her that he had changed his mind and she should report to work on her next scheduled work day. When she failed to come to work, she was fired. Under the circumstances, substantial evidence exists to support the decision of the Board that claimant’s absence from work without permission constituted misconduct and thus disqualifies her from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Casey, JJ., concur. Adjudged 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 January 26, 1993, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Following an argument between claimant and her supervi[808]*808sor, claimant was suspended for one week. At the hearing, however, claimant admitted that her supervisor told her that he had changed his mind and she should report to work on her next scheduled work day. When she failed to come to work, she was fired. Under the circumstances, substantial evidence exists to support the decision of the Board that claimant’s absence from work without permission constituted misconduct and thus disqualifies her from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

Mikoll, J. P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure, Crew III and Casey, JJ., concur. Adjudged that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 A.D.2d 807, 605 N.Y.S.2d 525, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12214, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-quinones-nyappdiv-1993.