In re the Claim of Boulware
Cases that cite this one
8 later published cases cite this decision.
- Smith v. Sampson (Alaska 1991)
- In re the Claim of Painter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- In re the Claim of Painter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
- In re the Claim of Campanella (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
- In re the Claim of Tandon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- In re the Claim of Brandsema (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1991)
- In re the Claim of Salomone (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1990)
- In re the Claim of Sylvester (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
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
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.
There is substantial evidence in the record to support the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s determination that claimant’s discharge resulted from misconduct in connection with his employment. The board was entitled to find that claimant’s conduct, in placing an uncovered paint can beneath his desk barely one day after he had received an explicit injunction not to leave open cans' of paint in the office, was not merely inadvertent but a volitional act in disregard of his employer’s specific instruction to the detriment of the latter’s interest. (See Matter of Norman [Ross], 53 AD2d 950; Matter of McGlynn [Levine], 52 AD2d 709).
*930 Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.