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 C. CHIOU, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 19, 2004, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Claimant worked at a bank from January 2003 until the end of May 2004. On a day when his sales manager was not at work, he asked for a day off following Memorial Day weekend. The service manager, who was in charge in the sales manager's absence, denied his request based upon instructions left by the sales manager concerning staffing. Claimant reported to work on the day he had requested off, but left at 1:00 P.M. without authorization. As a result, he was terminated from his position. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
We affirm. “It is well settled that an employee's unauthorized absence from work may constitute disqualifying misconduct” (Matter of Owens [Commissioner of Labor], 306 A.D.2d 608, 609, 759 N.Y.S.2d 713 [2003] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Jacque [Commissioner of Labor], 270 A.D.2d 541, 703 N.Y.S.2d 759 [2000] ). Here, claimant conceded that, although his request had been denied, he left work without prior approval to attend two appointments, one medical and the second personal. In view of this, substantial evidence supports the Board's decision.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
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: October 27, 2005
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)