From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Horsford v. Comm'r of Labor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 23, 2009
64 A.D.3d 1062 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 505966.

July 23, 2009.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 7, 2008, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Sheila A. Horsford, Baldwinsville, appellant pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York City (Mary Hughes of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Spain, J.P., Lahtinen, Malone Jr., Stein and Garry, JJ., concur.


Claimant worked as a caterer in a delicatessen for approximately eight months. She was discharged by her employer after allegedly directing profanity at him in the presence of other employees. Although her application for unemployment insurance benefits was initially denied, an Administrative Law Judge credited claimant's testimony over that of her employer and awarded her benefits following a hearing. Upon review, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reversed and ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she lost her employment due to misconduct. This appeal ensued.

We affirm. "[I]t is within the exclusive province of the Board to resolve . . . credibility issues and draw inferences from the evidence presented, even if its conclusions are contrary to those reached by the Administrative Law Judge" ( Matter of Radu [Commissioner of Labor], 13 AD3d 701, 702). Here, although claimant denied directing vulgar statements at her employer, both the employer and a former coworker testified that she did so and then left the premises just prior to the end of her shift. Accordingly, inasmuch as the use of profanities and insubordinate behavior constitutes disqualifying misconduct, we find no basis upon which to disturb the Board's decision ( see Matter of Kemp [Commissioner of Labor], 25 AD3d 1054, 1054).

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Horsford v. Comm'r of Labor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 23, 2009
64 A.D.3d 1062 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Horsford v. Comm'r of Labor

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of SHEILA A. HORSFORD, Appellant. COMMISSIONER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Jul 23, 2009

Citations

64 A.D.3d 1062 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 5927
883 N.Y.S.2d 633

Citing Cases

In re Tsilya Zaydman

Claimant's denial of any wrongdoing and claim that she was terminated because she had knowledge of alleged…

In re Poladian

We affirm. The Board is the final arbiter of factual matters involving questions of credibility and is not…