In re the Claim of Melendez
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- In re the Claim of Volmar (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2009)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 27, 2006, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.
We affirm. “An employee’s insubordinate behavior as evidenced by his or her failure to follow an employer’s reasonable instructions has been held to constitute disqualifying misconduct” (Matter of Benbow [Commissioner of Labor], 32 AD3d 1094, 1095 [2006] [citations omitted]). Here, the employer’s representatives testified that claimant was specifically told not to go to a restricted area to check on the status of his vacation request, but proceeded to do so anyway. This was after he engaged in an argument with another employee whom he threatened and called names. Claimant’s conflicting version of the incident presented a question of credibility for the Board to resolve (see Matter of Lambert [Commissioner of Labor], 34 AD3d 948 [2006]).
Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.