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 Patricia F. CAMPBELL, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 30, 1999, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant, a phlebotomist at a hospital, was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct. The record reveals that claimant became verbally abusive to a male patient and advised the patient, who was homosexual, that he was a sinner and would go to hell. Claimant made similar comments to the patient's roommate, who also was homosexual, and advised him that his tattoos were signs of the devil. Claimant was aware of the hospital's policy prohibiting employees from discriminating against patients based upon their sexual orientation or otherwise treating them in an inconsiderate manner, and it is well settled that such a failure to comply with the employer's established policies and procedures may constitute disqualifying misconduct (see, Matter of Williams [Progressive Home Health Care Servs.-Commissioner of Labor], 252 A.D.2d 649, 675 N.Y.S.2d 210; Matter of Rothman [Sweeney], 242 A.D.2d 818, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1025). Moreover, although claimant denied speaking to the patient's roommate, this merely presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Creary [Commissioner of Labor], 254 A.D.2d 644, 644-645, 679 N.Y.S.2d 187). We have reviewed claimant's remaining arguments and find them to be unpersuasive.
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: April 13, 2000
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)