From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Bisson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 7, 1991
170 A.D.2d 738 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

February 7, 1991

Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


The evidence establishes that the employer's request that claimant work an additional eight hours per year to take inventory was not unreasonable and that her reasons for refusal to work the overtime were not compelling. She had also been specifically advised by her employer that her refusal would result in her being discharged (see, Matter of Graziose [Levine], 50 A.D.2d 1030; Matter of Flores [Levine], 50 A.D.2d 1006). Accordingly, the conclusion that claimant's employment ended under disqualifying conditions and that her actions constituted misconduct is supported by substantial evidence (see, supra).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Weiss, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Bisson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 7, 1991
170 A.D.2d 738 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Matter of Bisson

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of DEBRA J. BISSON, Appellant. THOMAS F…

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

Date published: Feb 7, 1991

Citations

170 A.D.2d 738 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
566 N.Y.S.2d 100

Citing Cases

Matter of Beehan

Given claimant's work history and her employer's warning, we do not find that the overtime requested was…

In re Lemon

Nonetheless, claimant refused to provide the schedules despite being told that his continued refusal would…