In re the Claim of Stagno

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Stagno

239 A.D.2d 766, 657 N.Y.S.2d 480, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5238

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

DecidedMay 15, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by13 cases

This text of 239 A.D.2d 766 (In re the Claim of Stagno) 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 Stagno, 239 A.D.2d 766, 657 N.Y.S.2d 480, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5238 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 12, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a steel rule die maker. His employment was terminated after twice calling his supervisor a "fucking whore” in the course of a conversation regarding a rush order. Pursuant to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement between the employer and claimant’s union, an arbitration hearing ensued which resulted in a finding that just cause existed for claimant’s discharge in view of both his current infraction and the fact that he had previously been discharged for referring to the plant manager as “Hitler”. Claimant had won reinstatement following the arbitration proceeding resulting from the previous incident with an admonishment by his union to discontinue such conduct. Following its review of the instant matter, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board found that claimant had lost his employment due to misconduct, charging him with a recoverable overpayment. We affirm.

[767]*767The use of vulgar language and disrespectful conduct toward supervisors constitutes disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Schneider [Garden City Union Free School Dist.—Hudacs], 201 AD2d 811). Contrary to claimant’s contentions, the Board’s reliance upon the factual findings of the independent arbitrator, concluding that claimant was guilty of the charged acts of misconduct, was appropriate under the circumstances presented here (see, Matter of Belilovsky [Hudacs], 181 AD2d 936, 937). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be unpersuasive.

Mercure, J. P., Casey, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, 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 January 12, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was employed as a steel rule die maker. His employment was terminated after twice calling his supervisor a "fucking whore” in the course of a conversation regarding a rush order. Pursuant to the terms of the collective bargaining agreement between the employer and claimant’s union, an arbitration hearing ensued which resulted in a finding that just cause existed for claimant’s discharge in view of both his current infraction and the fact that he had previously been discharged for referring to the plant manager as “Hitler”. Claimant had won reinstatement following the arbitration proceeding resulting from the previous incident with an admonishment by his union to discontinue such conduct. Following its review of the instant matter, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board found that claimant had lost his employment due to misconduct, charging him with a recoverable overpayment. We affirm.

[767]*767The use of vulgar language and disrespectful conduct toward supervisors constitutes disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Schneider [Garden City Union Free School Dist.—Hudacs], 201 AD2d 811). Contrary to claimant’s contentions, the Board’s reliance upon the factual findings of the independent arbitrator, concluding that claimant was guilty of the charged acts of misconduct, was appropriate under the circumstances presented here (see, Matter of Belilovsky [Hudacs], 181 AD2d 936, 937). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been examined and found to be unpersuasive.

Mercure, J. P., Casey, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 A.D.2d 766, 657 N.Y.S.2d 480, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-stagno-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack