Matter of Sarson (Commr. of Labor)

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Sarson (Commr. of Labor)

138 A.D.3d 1327, 28 N.Y.S.3d 634

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

DecidedApril 21, 2016

Docket521428

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 138 A.D.3d 1327 (Matter of Sarson (Commr. of Labor)) 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

Matter of Sarson (Commr. of Labor), 138 A.D.3d 1327, 28 N.Y.S.3d 634 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 8, 2014, which ruled, among other things, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant, a utility worker with a food service company, lost his employment due to misconduct (see Matter of Shafer [Commissioner of Labor], 107 AD3d 1280, 1280 [2013]). The record establishes that claimant was discharged from his employment following an investigation by the employer into complaints that he made racial slurs to a coworker, which was in violation of a known policy of the employer. “It is well settled that violating a known policy of an employer can constitute disqualifying misconduct ... , as can offensive behavior in the workplace” (Matter of Manno [Commissioner of Labor], 8 AD3d 869, 869 [2004]; see Matter of Rivers [Federation Empl. & Guidance Serv .—Com missioner of Labor], 44 AD3d 1191, 1192 [2007]; Matter of Sarmiento [Newsday, Inc. —Commissioner of Labor], 287 AD2d 851, 852 [2001]). Although claimant denied making any racial remarks, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see Matter ofMulea [Commissioner of Labor], 23 AD3d 753, 754 [2005]). Furthermore, given that claimant indicated on his application for unemployment insurance benefits that he was discharged due to lack of work, the Board’s finding that claimant made a willful false statement to obtain benefits and its imposition of recoverable overpayments of benefits will not be disturbed (see Matter of Campon [Commissioner of Labor], 122 AD3d 1228, 1229 [2014]).

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Clark, 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 8, 2014, which ruled, among other things, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant, a utility worker with a food service company, lost his employment due to misconduct (see Matter of Shafer [Commissioner of Labor], 107 AD3d 1280, 1280 [2013]). The record establishes that claimant was discharged from his employment following an investigation by the employer into complaints that he made racial slurs to a coworker, which was in violation of a known policy of the employer. “It is well settled that violating a known policy of an employer can constitute disqualifying misconduct ... , as can offensive behavior in the workplace” (Matter of Manno [Commissioner of Labor], 8 AD3d 869, 869 [2004]; see Matter of Rivers [Federation Empl. & Guidance Serv .—Com missioner of Labor], 44 AD3d 1191, 1192 [2007]; Matter of Sarmiento [Newsday, Inc. —Commissioner of Labor], 287 AD2d 851, 852 [2001]). Although claimant denied making any racial remarks, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see Matter ofMulea [Commissioner of Labor], 23 AD3d 753, 754 [2005]). Furthermore, given that claimant indicated on his application for unemployment insurance benefits that he was discharged due to lack of work, the Board’s finding that claimant made a willful false statement to obtain benefits and its imposition of recoverable overpayments of benefits will not be disturbed (see Matter of Campon [Commissioner of Labor], 122 AD3d 1228, 1229 [2014]).

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Egan Jr. and Clark, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 A.D.3d 1327, 28 N.Y.S.3d 634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-sarson-commr-of-labor-nyappdiv-2016.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack