From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Kazaka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 13, 2007
46 A.D.3d 1071 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 502654.

December 13, 2007.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 29, 2006, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Michael W. Kazaka, Brewerton, appellant pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York City (Marjorie S. Leff of counsel), for respondent.

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


Claimant worked as a sorter for United Parcel Service for approximately 14 years, until he was fired in November 2005 due to a poor attendance record. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board denied his ensuing application for unemployment insurance benefits on the basis that his employment had been terminated because of misconduct. Claimant now appeals.

We affirm. An employee's failure, in the face of repeated prior warnings, to comply with an employer's tardiness policy can constitute disqualifying misconduct ( see Matter of Morgan [New York City Dept. of Probation — Commissioner of Labor], 42 AD3d 846). Here, the record reveals that, despite the fact that claimant had already been warned several times regarding problems with him being late, he failed to report to work on time on his last date of employment. As for claimant's offering of an exculpatory explanation for his conduct, a credibility issue was created for resolution by the Board ( see Matter of Chrysler [Commissioner of Labor], 9 AD3d 728, 728-729). Given the foregoing, substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant was discharged from his employment for misconduct ( see Matter of Valenta [Commissioner of Labor], 38 AD3d 1070, 1071).

To the extent not specifically addressed herein, claimant's remaining assertions have been considered and are rejected.

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re Kazaka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Dec 13, 2007
46 A.D.3d 1071 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

In re Kazaka

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of MICHAEL W. KAZAKA, Appellant. COMMISSIONER…

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

Date published: Dec 13, 2007

Citations

46 A.D.3d 1071 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9853
847 N.Y.S.2d 297

Citing Cases

Puello v. Comm'r of Labor

We affirm. "Whether a claimant has engaged in disqualifying misconduct is a factual question for the Board to…

In re Puello

ion for unemployment insurance benefits was denied on the ground that he was terminated for misconduct which,…