From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ortiz v. N.Y. Eye & Ear Infirmary

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Jul 5, 2012
97 A.D.3d 885 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

Opinion

2012-07-5

In the Matter of the Claim of Diana ORTIZ, Appellant. New York Eye and Ear Infirmary, Respondent. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

Diana Ortiz, New York City, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Gary Leibowitz of counsel), for Commissioner of Labor, respondent.


Diana Ortiz, New York City, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Gary Leibowitz of counsel), for Commissioner of Labor, respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 1, 2011, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant, an administrative assistant, was terminated for insubordination after she refused to cooperate with the employer's investigation of an earlier incident involving an angry dispute that claimant had with a tenant's employee. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that she was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she lost her job due to misconduct. Claimant appeals and we affirm.

“An employee's failure to comply with an employer's reasonable request may constitute insubordination rising to the level of disqualifying misconduct” (Matter of Guagliardo [Commissioner of Labor], 27 A.D.3d 866, 867, 810 N.Y.S.2d 557 [2006] [citations omitted]; see Matter of Setzer [Commissioner of Labor], 69 A.D.3d 1087, 893 N.Y.S.2d 344 [2010] ). Here, claimant admittedly refused repeated requests by the employer's director that she discuss the incident with him. Given the reasonableness of this request and the absence of a compelling reason for claimant's refusal ( see Matter of Guagliardo [Commissioner of Labor], 27 A.D.3d at 867, 810 N.Y.S.2d 557), we find no basis to reverse the Board's decision.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

ROSE, J.P., SPAIN, KAVANAGH, McCARTHY and EGAN JR., JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ortiz v. N.Y. Eye & Ear Infirmary

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Jul 5, 2012
97 A.D.3d 885 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
Case details for

Ortiz v. N.Y. Eye & Ear Infirmary

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of Diana ORTIZ, Appellant. New York Eye and Ear…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Jul 5, 2012

Citations

97 A.D.3d 885 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)
947 N.Y.S.2d 350
2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 5369

Citing Cases

Thompson v. St. Paul's Episcopal Church

We affirm. “[W]hether a claimant has engaged in disqualifying misconduct is a factual issue for the Board to…

In re Thompson

We affirm. "[W]hether a claimant has engaged in disqualifying misconduct is a factual issue for the Board to…