In re the Claim of Wade

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Wade

198 A.D.2d 699, 604 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10736

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

DecidedNovember 18, 1993

StatusPublished

This text of 198 A.D.2d 699 (In re the Claim of Wade) 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 Wade, 198 A.D.2d 699, 604 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10736 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 29, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant lost her job as a retail clothing salesperson due to excessive lateness. On appeal claimant does not deny that she was excessively late, she merely argues that, due to her loyalty to her employer, she should not have been terminated. Under the circumstances, however, substantial evidence exists to support the Board’s decision that claimant’s actions, after receiving repeated warnings, constituted misconduct and thus disqualified her from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

Crew III, J. P., Cardona, White, Mahoney and Casey, 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 October 29, 1992, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant lost her job as a retail clothing salesperson due to excessive lateness. On appeal claimant does not deny that she was excessively late, she merely argues that, due to her loyalty to her employer, she should not have been terminated. Under the circumstances, however, substantial evidence exists to support the Board’s decision that claimant’s actions, after receiving repeated warnings, constituted misconduct and thus disqualified her from receiving unemployment insurance benefits.

Crew III, J. P., Cardona, White, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D.2d 699, 604 N.Y.S.2d 284, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10736, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-wade-nyappdiv-1993.