In re the Claim of Sinker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Sinker

226 A.D.2d 878, 641 N.Y.S.2d 153, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3684

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

DecidedApril 11, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 878 (In re the Claim of Sinker) 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 Sinker, 226 A.D.2d 878, 641 N.Y.S.2d 153, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 19, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct.

[879]*879Claimant, chief counsel for a title abstract company, left his position after being convicted of mail fraud. The Board denied his application for unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he lost his employment through misconduct. Claimant challenges this decision, arguing, inter alia, that his felony conviction was not "in connection with” his employment (Labor Law § 593 [4]) and, therefore, the Board should not have disqualified him from receiving benefits. We disagree. Claimant was convicted of submitting a false insurance claim. Inasmuch as his employer exercised the fiduciary function of holding money during title closings as part of its business, we agree with the Board that claimant’s conviction reflected adversely on his employer’s integrity (see, Matter of Markowitz [New York City Human Resources Admin.—Roberts], 94 AD2d 155). Consequently, we decline to disturb the Board’s decision.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Casey and Peters, 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 May 19, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct.

[879]*879Claimant, chief counsel for a title abstract company, left his position after being convicted of mail fraud. The Board denied his application for unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he lost his employment through misconduct. Claimant challenges this decision, arguing, inter alia, that his felony conviction was not "in connection with” his employment (Labor Law § 593 [4]) and, therefore, the Board should not have disqualified him from receiving benefits. We disagree. Claimant was convicted of submitting a false insurance claim. Inasmuch as his employer exercised the fiduciary function of holding money during title closings as part of its business, we agree with the Board that claimant’s conviction reflected adversely on his employer’s integrity (see, Matter of Markowitz [New York City Human Resources Admin.—Roberts], 94 AD2d 155). Consequently, we decline to disturb the Board’s decision.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

226 A.D.2d 878, 641 N.Y.S.2d 153, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3684, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-sinker-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack