In re the Claim of Rotunno

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Rotunno

200 A.D.2d 847, 608 N.Y.S.2d 879, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 224

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

DecidedJanuary 13, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 200 A.D.2d 847 (In re the Claim of Rotunno) 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 Rotunno, 200 A.D.2d 847, 608 N.Y.S.2d 879, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 224 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 30, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The Board found that claimant was repeatedly late for work and that this behavior continued after she had received warnings that it was not acceptable. We find substantial evidence in the record to support the Board’s finding that this constituted disqualifying misconduct.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., 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 September 30, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The Board found that claimant was repeatedly late for work and that this behavior continued after she had received warnings that it was not acceptable. We find substantial evidence in the record to support the Board’s finding that this constituted disqualifying misconduct.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

200 A.D.2d 847, 608 N.Y.S.2d 879, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-rotunno-nyappdiv-1994.