In re the Claim of Robles

416 N.E.2d 1037, 51 N.Y.2d 955, 435 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2820
New York Court of Appeals·Decided November 18, 1980·Published

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The record contains substantial evidence to support the finding that claimant’s employment was terminated for misconduct. We note that, contrary to claimant’s contention, misconduct remains a statutory ground which renders an employee ineligible for unemployment benefits (Labor Law, § 593), and was not affected by cases limiting the provoked discharge doctrine (e.g., Matter of De Grego [Levine], 39 NY2d 180, 184; Matter of James [Levine], 34 NY2d 491).

[957] Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re the Claim of Robles, 416 N.E.2d 1037, 51 N.Y.2d 955, 435 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1980 N.Y. LEXIS 2820 (N.Y. 1980).

416 N.E.2d 1037 (In re the Claim of Robles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of James (Levine)
315 N.E.2d 471 (New York Court of Appeals, 1974)
In re the Claim of De Grego
347 N.E.2d 611 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)