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 Barry G. HAWKINS, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 7, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant was discharged from his employment as an assistant manager of a retail electronics store for repeatedly violating the employer's policy governing employee purchases. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct. We affirm. Claimant admitted that he violated the employer's policies by purchasing used goods from the employer, taking unauthorized merchandise discounts and reselling merchandise to the employer for more than the purchase price. A knowing violation of an employer's reasonable policy may constitute disqualifying misconduct, especially where, as here, the violation is detrimental to the employer's interest (see, Matter of Blaine [Sweeney], 244 A.D.2d 753, 664 N.Y.S.2d 395). Claimant's attempt to excuse his conduct created a credibility issue that the Board was entitled to resolve against him (see, Matter of Perkov [Sweeney], 231 A.D.2d 780, 647 N.Y.S.2d 48). We have examined claimant's remaining contentions and find them to be devoid of merit.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: October 15, 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)