From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 9, 1997
243 A.D.2d 808 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

October 9, 1997

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


We affirm the ruling that claimant lost her employment as a merchandising coordinator due to disqualifying misconduct. Claimant's termination arose out of certain telephone conversations initiated by her supervisor wherein he informed claimant that he had prepared a letter of reprimand concerning her previous unauthorized early departure from work. In response, claimant told her supervisor that he was being "asinine" and hung up on him. Claimant refused to take the supervisor's subsequent telephone call, as the result of which her employment was terminated. An employee's refusal to comply with a supervisor's reasonable request, such as that he or she acknowledge a critical performance evaluation, has been found to constitute disqualifying misconduct ( see, Matter of Talyansky [Magna Prods. Corp. — Sweeney], 236 A.D.2d 728) as has an employee's disrespectful conduct toward a supervisor ( see, Matter of Schneider [Garden City Union Free School Dist. — Hudacs], 201 A.D.2d 811). Substantial evidence supports the finding that claimant lost her employment under such disqualifying circumstances.

Cardona, P.J., Mikoll, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Brown

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Oct 9, 1997
243 A.D.2d 808 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Matter of Brown

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of CARLINE P. BROWN, Appellant. JOHN E…

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

Date published: Oct 9, 1997

Citations

243 A.D.2d 808 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
665 N.Y.S.2d 334

Citing Cases

Matter of Richards

Although claimant maintains that she had good intentions and her conduct constituted, at worst, an excusable…

In re the Claim of Di Maria

We affirm. Conduct which is detrimental to the employer's best interest as well as disrespectful conduct…