In re the Claim of Shorte

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Shorte

270 A.D.2d 554, 703 N.Y.S.2d 587, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2370

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

DecidedMarch 2, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 270 A.D.2d 554 (In re the Claim of Shorte) 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 Shorte, 270 A.D.2d 554, 703 N.Y.S.2d 587, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2370 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 30, 1998, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

[555]*555Claimant, employed as a senior paralegal, was discharged from her employment due to excessive tardiness. The record reveals that claimant had received both written and verbal warnings regarding her tardiness and had been cautioned that continued tardiness could result in her termination. Inasmuch as an employee’s excessive lateness after oral and written warnings has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision denying benefits to claimant (see, Matter of Long [Commissioner of Labor], 255 AD2d 678). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Mugglin, 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 November 30, 1998, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

[555]*555Claimant, employed as a senior paralegal, was discharged from her employment due to excessive tardiness. The record reveals that claimant had received both written and verbal warnings regarding her tardiness and had been cautioned that continued tardiness could result in her termination. Inasmuch as an employee’s excessive lateness after oral and written warnings has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct, we conclude that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision denying benefits to claimant (see, Matter of Long [Commissioner of Labor], 255 AD2d 678). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Peters and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 A.D.2d 554, 703 N.Y.S.2d 587, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2370, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-shorte-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack