Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: the Claim of Karen R. CHRISTIAN, Appellant. John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 8, 1995, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant was employed as a purchasing assistant at a company that sold graphic art supplies. After notification that her request for a raise had been denied, claimant left work early and did not return for a week, explaining that she needed this time off to recover from the resulting emotional trauma. After her second day's absence, the employer notified claimant that her absence was unauthorized and would not be tolerated. When claimant finally appeared at work, she was informed that her employment had been terminated. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct. We affirm.
Unauthorized absences from work have been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Cassaro [Sweeney], 221 A.D.2d 790, 633 N.Y.S.2d 426; Matter of Lespier [Hartnett], 178 A.D.2d 704, 577 N.Y.S.2d 166), as have acts that are detrimental to the employer's interest (see, Matter of Chapman [Hudacs], 190 A.D.2d 941, 593 N.Y.S.2d 602). Testimony included in the record discloses not only that claimant did not receive permission to take a week off, but also that no one else had been trained to perform claimant's job responsibilities in her absence. The Board's finding of disqualifying misconduct on the part of claimant was supported by substantial evidence and it is, accordingly, affirmed.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: February 20, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)