In re the Claim of Selzer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Selzer

241 A.D.2d 743, 660 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7465

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

DecidedJuly 17, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 241 A.D.2d 743 (In re the Claim of Selzer) 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 Selzer, 241 A.D.2d 743, 660 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7465 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 29, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as an emergency medical technician for a private ambulance service. After delivering a patient to a hospital, claimant requested clean stretcher sheets from a hospital employee. When his request was refused, claimant was heard by several people to remark that the hospital was “turning into a Jew hospital”. After a hospital administrator complained to the employer regarding claimant’s remarks, he was discharged. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because his job was terminated due to misconduct. Offensive behavior in the workplace, including the utterance of religious or ethnic slurs, has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Weiss [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 672) as has conduct that is detrimental to the employer’s interest (see, Matter of Krupa [Sweeney], 236 AD2d 772). Claimant’s conduct was both offensive and detrimental to his employer’s interest. The ruling of disqualification is, accordingly, affirmed.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters and Spain, 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 December 29, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as an emergency medical technician for a private ambulance service. After delivering a patient to a hospital, claimant requested clean stretcher sheets from a hospital employee. When his request was refused, claimant was heard by several people to remark that the hospital was “turning into a Jew hospital”. After a hospital administrator complained to the employer regarding claimant’s remarks, he was discharged. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because his job was terminated due to misconduct. Offensive behavior in the workplace, including the utterance of religious or ethnic slurs, has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Weiss [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 672) as has conduct that is detrimental to the employer’s interest (see, Matter of Krupa [Sweeney], 236 AD2d 772). Claimant’s conduct was both offensive and detrimental to his employer’s interest. The ruling of disqualification is, accordingly, affirmed.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 A.D.2d 743, 660 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7465, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-selzer-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack