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 Neal STUBER, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 8, 2005, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant, a part-time driver's education teacher, was terminated from his position as a result of reporting to work under the influence of alcohol in contravention of the employer's policy prohibiting persons from coming onto school grounds in such condition. After various proceedings, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board found that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his employment due to misconduct. Claimant appeals.
Initially, we note that an employee's failure to abide by an employer's reasonable policies which, in turn, has a detrimental effect upon the employer's interest has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct (see Matter of Vesseliza [Commissioner of Labor], 22 A.D.3d 1011, 1012, 802 N.Y.S.2d 566 [2005] ). Disqualifying misconduct has also been found where an employee reports to work under the influence of alcohol, unless evidence is adduced establishing that the employee suffers from the disease of alcoholism (see Matter of Kiteta [Commissioner of Labor], 4 A.D.3d 712, 713, 771 N.Y.S.2d 917 [2004]; Matter of Kryszak [Commissioner of Labor], 308 A.D.2d 645, 646, 764 N.Y.S.2d 370 [2003] ). Here, while claimant asserts that he suffers from that disease, he failed to present evidence substantiating his claim despite the fact that the proceedings were specifically extended to give him an opportunity to do so. Inasmuch as substantial evidence supports the Board's decision, we find no reason to disturb it.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
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: September 14, 2006
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)