Opinion
95042.
Decided and Entered: June 3, 2004.
Appeals (1) from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 20, 2003, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct, and (2) from a decision of said Board, filed April 22, 2003, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its original decision.
Ali, Pappas Cox P.C., Syracuse (David P. Doherty of counsel), for appellant.
Before: Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Claimant was discharged from her position as a sales associate at a gas station and convenience store after she was observed on videotape stealing cigarettes. Criminal charges were brought against her as a result of this incident and were adjourned in contemplation of dismissal in exchange for her payment of restitution in the amount of $120. The Department of Labor found claimant eligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits and this determination was upheld by an Administrative Law Judge following a hearing. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, however, reversed and disqualified claimant from receiving benefits on the ground that she was terminated due to misconduct. Claimant now appeals.
We affirm. "`An employee's apparent dishonesty * * * can constitute disqualifying misconduct'" (Matter of Washington [ Commissioner of Labor], 304 A.D.2d 896, 896, quoting Matter of Huggins [Samaritan Med. Ctr. — Commissioner of Labor], 257 A.D.2d 877, 878; accord Matter of Alexander [Commissioner of Labor], 3 A.D.3d 827, 827). Here, the employer's representative testified at the hearing that he viewed the videotape showing claimant taking the cigarettes and that, after the incident, claimant sent the employer a check for $120. Although claimant denied that she stole anything from the employer, this presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see Matter of Petrosov [Commissioner of Labor], 284 A.D.2d 874, 875; Matter of Williams [Commissioner of Labor], 262 A.D.2d 903, 903).
Spain, J.P., Mugglin, Rose, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the decisions are affirmed, without costs.