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 Charles CARTER, Appellant. New York City Department of Personnel, Respondent. John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 17, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Following an arbitration hearing held pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75, claimant was discharged from his employment as a correction officer for various violations of his employer's policies and regulations regarding, inter alia, sick leave.1 The Board properly gave collateral estoppel effect to the factual findings of the arbitrator inasmuch as claimant was given a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue of his misconduct at the arbitration hearing (see, Matter of Fox [Sweeney], 233 A.D.2d 645, 649 N.Y.S.2d 748; Matter of Kilgore [Triboro Coach Corp.-Sweeney], 227 A.D.2d 710, 641 N.Y.S.2d 648). Given the arbitrator's finding that claimant willfully violated the employer's sick leave policies, substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits (see, Matter of Kobb [Sweeney], 235 A.D.2d 889, 652 N.Y.S.2d 844).
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
FOOTNOTES
1. On administrative appeal of the arbitrator's decision, which was not complete at the time of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision, the factual findings were affirmed but suspension was recommended rather than termination.
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: September 04, 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)