From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Johns

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 8, 2000
273 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Decided and Entered: June 8, 2000.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 25, 1999, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Margaret A. Johns, Schenectady, appellant in person.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Spain, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Claimant, employed as a part-time marketing and communications representative, was terminated after she failed to adhere to the employer's policy regarding personal calls. The record reveals that claimant was warned on three occasions and despite these warnings continued making personal calls. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board found that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she was terminated for misconduct. Based upon our review of the record, we find that the Board's decision is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Spinelli [Sweeney], 231 A.D.2d 800).

Claimant's failure to adhere to the employer's reasonable conditions could be found to rise to a level of disqualifying misconduct. Accordingly, we find no reason to disturb the Board's decision.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Johns

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 8, 2000
273 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Matter of Johns

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF MARGARET A. JOHNS, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF LABOR…

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

Date published: Jun 8, 2000

Citations

273 A.D.2d 532 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
709 N.Y.S.2d 458

Citing Cases

Matter of the Claim of Bentley

The conflicting testimony presented by claimant and his supervisor as to whether claimant was permitted to…

In re Barnes

We affirm. Based upon our review of the record, we find that the decision of the Unemployment Insurance…