In re the Claim of Samuel

97 A.D.3d 886, 948 N.Y.2d 199

This text of 97 A.D.3d 886 (In re the Claim of Samuel) 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 Samuel, 97 A.D.3d 886, 948 N.Y.2d 199 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

Claimant, a paraprofessional for a public school, was terminated from her employment after she took unauthorized leave from work to attend a two-week convention in South Africa during the school year. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she lost her employment through misconduct. We affirm. It is undisputed that claimant purchased her plane ticket for this conference [887]*887prior to requesting permission from the employer and, further, that she left for the trip even after being informed that her request was denied and she would be subject to termination if she failed to comply. Moreover, there is proof that, due to claimant’s unauthorized absence and budget restrictions, the employer was forced to hire a substitute from funds set aside for school supplies. Under these circumstances, we find substantial evidence in the record supporting the Board’s conclusion that claimant’s unauthorized absence from work constituted disqualifying misconduct (see Matter of Rivers [Carbone Auto Group — Commissioner of Labor], 77 AD3d 1010, 1011 [2010]; Matter of Roe [Commissioner of Labor], 62 AD3d 1105, 1106 [2009]).

Mercure, J.P., Lahtinen, Malone Jr., Stein and Egan 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

Related

In re the Claim of Roe
62 A.D.3d 1105 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
In re the Claim of Rivers
77 A.D.3d 1010 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 A.D.3d 886, 948 N.Y.2d 199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-samuel-nyappdiv-2012.