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 Dawn A. GIBSON, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 31, 1996, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Following a dispute with a client, claimant, a security receptionist, was informed by her supervisor on July 15, 1994 that she was being taken off this assignment and directed to report to work the following week for a new one. On the morning of July 18, 1994, however, claimant personally contacted the former client to discuss the loss of her assignment. Claimant was thereafter discharged for violating the employer's rule prohibiting employees from addressing questions regarding, inter alia, assignments with clients. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant lost her job under disqualifying circumstances and we find substantial evidence in the record to support that determination. It is well settled that failure to comply with an employer's established policies and acting in a manner contrary to the employer's best interests can constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Rothman [Sweeney], 242 A.D.2d 818, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1025). There is evidence that claimant was aware, or should have been aware, of the employer's rule and her exculpatory explanation for her conduct merely raised a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Naraine [Sweeney], 245 A.D.2d 932, 933, 666 N.Y.S.2d 844, 845).
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: May 07, 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)