In re the Claim of Zegarelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Zegarelli

241 A.D.2d 616, 660 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7220

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 3, 1997·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 22, 1996, which ruled, inter alia, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was suspended from his employment as a police officer as a result of being convicted upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the third degree. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision that claimant’s criminal conviction constitutes disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Cerasuolo [New York City Dept. of Correction—Hudacs], 205 AD2d 827; Matter of Rose [New York City Dept. of Social Servs.—Hudacs], 190 AD2d 926) and that the recoverable overpayment was properly assessed (see, Labor Law § 597 [3], [4]). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Peters 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 August 22, 1996, which ruled, inter alia, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant was suspended from his employment as a police officer as a result of being convicted upon his plea of guilty of the crime of criminal possession of a forged instrument in the third degree. Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision that claimant’s criminal conviction constitutes disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Cerasuolo [New York City Dept. of Correction—Hudacs], 205 AD2d 827; Matter of Rose [New York City Dept. of Social Servs.—Hudacs], 190 AD2d 926) and that the recoverable overpayment was properly assessed (see, Labor Law § 597 [3], [4]). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of Zegarelli, 241 A.D.2d 616, 660 N.Y.S.2d 1010, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7220 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

241 A.D.2d 616 (In re the Claim of Zegarelli) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related