From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of the Claim of Petrosov

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 28, 2001
284 A.D.2d 874 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

Decided and Entered: June 28, 2001.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 8, 2000, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Tanya Petrosov, Flushing, appellant in person.

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


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Claimant was discharged from her employment as a cashier for allegedly stealing money from the cash register. Following an initial determination by respondent that claimant was eligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits, the employer objected, asserting that claimant had been discharged under disqualifying circumstances. Following a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge determined that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirmed the Administrative Law Judge's decision and this appeal by claimant ensued.

We affirm. Notwithstanding claimant's assertion that the Board's decision should be reversed inasmuch as the employer subsequently withdrew his objection to her eligibility to receive benefits, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant engaged in disqualifying misconduct. It is well settled that "[a]n employee's apparent dishonesty or failure to comply with the employer's established policies and procedures can constitute disqualifying misconduct" (Matter of Huggins [Samaritan Med. Ctr. — Commissioner of Labor], 257 A.D.2d 877, 878; see, Matter of Williams [Commissioner of Labor], 262 A.D.2d 903, 905). To the extent that claimant's version of the events surrounding her termination differed from that of the employer, this conflict presented a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Derian [Sweeney], 239 A.D.2d 722, 723).

Mercure, J.P., Peters, Spain, Carpinello and Rose, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of the Claim of Petrosov

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 28, 2001
284 A.D.2d 874 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Matter of the Claim of Petrosov

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of TANYA PETROSOV, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF…

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

Date published: Jun 28, 2001

Citations

284 A.D.2d 874 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
727 N.Y.S.2d 528

Citing Cases

Matter of the Claim of Morgan

Claimant further conceded his understanding that transfer of the permit was against the employer's rules.…

Matter of the Claim of McCarthy

While the record indicates that claimant requested that the June 7, 1996 misconduct decision be reopened and…