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 John GUERRIERO, Appellant. John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 18, 1996, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its previous decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant was employed as an armed security guard at a Federal Reserve Bank building until his employment was terminated after he inadvertently discharged a revolver in the bank's lobby. The record discloses that claimant was examining the gun of a fellow employee and, in order to test the trigger action, unloaded it and depressed the trigger. A bullet remaining in the gun discharged and, after ricocheting off a glass door and a stone wall, landed in the vestibule. Claimant was fired after the bank informed his employer that it no longer wanted his services. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant had lost his employment due to disqualifying misconduct. We affirm. A claimant's commission of acts that violate generally accepted standards of employee behavior or that are contrary to the employer's best interests has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Abbott [Sweeney], 238 A.D.2d 653, 654, 655 N.Y.S.2d 681, 682; Matter of Hall [Hudacs], 192 A.D.2d 1043, 1044, 597 N.Y.S.2d 252). Testimony at claimant's hearing disclosed that claimant's conduct not only endangered the safety of everyone in or near the bank's lobby but that it also subjected the employer's security agency to derision and ultimately led to the discontinuance of armed guards at all Federal Reserve Banks. We conclude that substantial evidence supported the Board's decision which is, accordingly, affirmed.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANUDM 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 19, 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)