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: Rosemary B. McKINLEY, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 30, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant was terminated from her position as a residential counselor for a mental health treatment facility for teenagers following an incident whereby a disturbance broke out after a client received unauthorized visitors in violation of the employer's policy. Although other counselors were already on duty when claimant started her shift, claimant was shift supervisor. Claimant was discharged for her failure to take action to remove the visitors when she started her shift and realized that the rule was being violated.
We find that substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision that claimant was terminated due to misconduct (see, Matter of Gallo [Hudacs], 206 A.D.2d 649, 650, 614 N.Y.S.2d 617). Although claimant maintains that she was unfairly singled out for punishment by the employer, the record indicates that she had been disciplined for rule infractions in the past and, in any event, “[f]ailure to comply with the employer's established policies and procedures constitutes disqualifying misconduct” (Matter of Rooney [Sweeney], 236 A.D.2d 775, 654 N.Y.S.2d 51). To the extent that claimant presented testimony that conflicted with that of the employer, this presented an issue of credibility for the Board to resolve (Matter of Sands [Sweeney], 243 A.D.2d 798, 665 N.Y.S.2d 338).
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: April 30, 1998
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)