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 Johnny R. MARTE, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 6, 2004, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant, a truck driver helper, was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because he refused a reasonable request of the employer to make a delivery to New Jersey. Although claimant maintained that he was unfamiliar with the route, the employer testified that the location was approximately five miles from its business and that claimant was given a map. Claimant continued to refuse the assignment even after being warned that he could be discharged. Moreover, the record indicates that claimant previously had made deliveries to New Jersey. Under these circumstances, the Board's decision that claimant engaged in disqualifying misconduct will not be disturbed (see Matter of Marcano [Commissioner of Labor], 271 A.D.2d 795, 706 N.Y.S.2d 488 [2000]; Matter of Moucatel [Hudacs], 205 A.D.2d 822, 613 N.Y.S.2d 60 [1994] ). Claimant's contention that he did not have the proper license to drive a truck in New Jersey was not raised at the hearing and, therefore, is not properly before this Court (see Matter of Hicks [Commissioner of Labor], 10 A.D.3d 758, 781 N.Y.S.2d 718 [2004] ).
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: January 06, 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)