From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of the Claim of Hailstock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 11, 2003
308 A.D.2d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

93640

September 11, 2003.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 20, 2002, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Guttman Wallace, Ithaca (Richard M. Wallace of counsel), for appellant.

Bond, Schoeneck King, Syracuse (R. Daniel Bordoni of counsel), for Borg-Warner Morse Tec, Inc., respondent.

Before: Peters, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Claimant's job responsibilities included the operation of furnaces used to harden and temper automotive parts. He was discharged after failing to operate one of the furnaces according to the employer's established procedures, resulting in damage to the parts being treated. Claimant had received repeated warnings for similar infractions, the most recent of which had been issued one week earlier. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits on the ground that his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Substantial evidence supports the Board's decision finding that claimant engaged in disqualifying misconduct based upon his disregard of the employer's established procedures, a lapse that was detrimental to the employer's interests (see Matter of Gibson [Commissioner of Labor], 250 A.D.2d 906). This is particularly true in cases such as the instant matter, where claimant was repeatedly warned regarding similar infractions (see Matter of Sheehan [Commissioner of Labor], 268 A.D.2d 856; Matter of Forde [Commissioner of Labor], 253 A.D.2d 925). Although claimant attempts to excuse his misconduct by attributing it to medical and personal problems including diabetes, depression and emotional stress, he failed to produce any documentation, medical or otherwise, to support this assertion (see Matter of Harpule [Sweeney], 241 A.D.2d 610). The remaining issues raised herein have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Peters, J.P., Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of the Claim of Hailstock

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Sep 11, 2003
308 A.D.2d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Matter of the Claim of Hailstock

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF EUGENE HAILSTOCK, Appellant. BORG-WARNER…

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

Date published: Sep 11, 2003

Citations

308 A.D.2d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
764 N.Y.S.2d 212

Citing Cases

Matter of Horvath

Claimant's sole contention is that the settlement agreement with her employer which resolved the…

In the Matter of Adams

Upon investigating a complaint against claimant, it was discovered that claimant, who was on final warning…