From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re the Claim of Mora

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 18, 1991
175 A.D.2d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

July 18, 1991

Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


Claimant worked as a steward for the Plaza Hotel in New York City for 20 years. On or about April 7, 1989, while across the street from his place of employment, he was observed handing two plastic bags containing cocaine to an unidentified person. It is noted that claimant disagrees with his employer's assertion that this exchange took place during work hours; however, such a dispute is of no moment in deciding this case. On April 13, 1989, claimant's employment was terminated by the hotel. On April 14, 1989, claimant was arrested for selling drugs to an undercover police officer. After pleading guilty to intent to sell a controlled substance, he was sentenced to five years' probation. He applied for unemployment benefits but was disqualified from receiving benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct. This appeal ensued.

Claimant contends that there is no evidence in the record indicating that he ever engaged in any misconduct "in connection with" his employment at the Plaza Hotel and therefore the determination is not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree. Claimant pleaded guilty to intent to sell a controlled substance and we find that his conduct in that regard constituted misconduct. We have previously had occasion to hold, in a case similar to this, that "[m]isconduct committed during nonworking hours, which raises serious questions as to a worker's integrity, bears a relationship to his work within the meaning of * * * section 593 Lab. of the Labor Law" (Matter of Bruggeman [Roberts], 101 A.D.2d 973, lv denied 63 N.Y.2d 608; see, Matter of Gill [New York Tel. Co. — Ross] 78 A.D.2d 749). The finding of misconduct by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board is supported by substantial evidence and must be upheld (see, Matter of McCallum [New York City Dept. of Transp. Bur. of Highways — Roberts], 126 A.D.2d 833, lv denied 69 N.Y.2d 613).

Casey, J.P., Yesawich Jr., Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re the Claim of Mora

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jul 18, 1991
175 A.D.2d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

In re the Claim of Mora

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of FRANCO MORA, Appellant. THOMAS F. HARTNETT…

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

Date published: Jul 18, 1991

Citations

175 A.D.2d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
572 N.Y.S.2d 535

Citing Cases

Matter of Rose

Claimant's employment as a special officer required honesty, integrity and good moral character. Because his…

Matter of Atkinson

The only remaining issue is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the Board's finding of claimant's…