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 Gina C. GARNICA, Appellant. Dolce International, Doing Business as Terrytown House, Respondent; Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 9, 1998, 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 discharged from her employment as a laundry attendant as a result of failing to notify the employer of a practical joke whereby sewing machine oil was placed in a co-worker's drinking cup. Although claimant did not personally place the hazardous substance in the co-worker's cup, she nevertheless was aware that the “joke” was being perpetrated. Contrary to the employer's established policy, claimant failed to report the potentially dangerous situation to the employer. Given claimant's conduct, which was detrimental to the employer's best interest and contrary to the standards of behavior that the employer had a right to expect, together with the potentially serious consequences of the incident, we find substantial evidence in the record to support the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant was discharged from her employment due to disqualifying misconduct (see generally, Matter of Rohnke [Hudacs], 192 A.D.2d 812, 813, 596 N.Y.S.2d 494). Claimant's remaining contentions, including her assertion that her conduct merely constituted poor judgment, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.
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 13, 1999
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)