From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re the Claim of De Scetto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 25, 1976
51 A.D.2d 1100 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Opinion

March 25, 1976


Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 17, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner disqualifying claimant from receiving benefits. Claimant, a clothing salesman in a retail store, had been warned on April 14 that he would be discharged if his attendance did not improve by June 1. From April 14 to June 2 claimant reported late for work 22 times. He was thereupon discharged. Claimant conceded that his starting time was 9:30 A.M. and admitted that he consistently failed to report to work until 9:45 A.M., allegedly because he had no work to do until then. Claimant's conduct following the warning in regard to lateness constituted misconduct in connection with his employment (Matter of Greene [Levine], 48 A.D.2d 747). There is substantial evidence in this record to support the board's determination (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Roth [Catherwood], 34 A.D.2d 1081). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P.J., Sweeney, Mahoney, Larkin and Reynolds, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re the Claim of De Scetto

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Mar 25, 1976
51 A.D.2d 1100 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)
Case details for

In re the Claim of De Scetto

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of NICHOLAS DE SCETTO, Appellant. LOUIS L…

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

Date published: Mar 25, 1976

Citations

51 A.D.2d 1100 (N.Y. App. Div. 1976)

Citing Cases

Matter of Moscicki

Claimant also acknowledged that it was against company policy to sleep until after a delivery was made, and…

Matter of Maher

Prior to claimant's discharge, his employer followed company policy with respect to warning him and…