Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
In re the Claim of Johnson
Citations: 105 A.D.2d 1033; 483 N.Y.S.2d 183; 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 21114
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; November 28, 1984; New York; State Appellate Court
An appeal was filed concerning a decision by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which determined that the claimant, a former clerk at the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, was entitled to unemployment benefits following his discharge on December 3, 1982. The claimant had been employed from January 5, 1981, until his termination and was involved in a conversation with a co-worker about stealing blank checks. Although the claimant did not take the suggestion seriously, he did not report it to the employer, nor did he participate in the theft that ultimately occurred. The administrative law judge ruled that the claimant's failure to inform the employer of the co-worker's plan constituted misconduct, resulting in disqualification from benefits. However, the Board reversed this decision, concluding that the claimant had no obligation to report the co-worker's suggestion, thus awarding him benefits. The employer appealed this decision. The Board's finding that the claimant was terminated for not reporting knowledge of a potential illegal act was supported by evidence and must be accepted. The legal precedent cited by the employer pertains to misconduct related to known and completed illegal acts, which differs from the claimant's situation where the act was only a suggestion with no follow-through. The distinction lies in the nature of the threat to the employer's interests. Whether the claimant's inaction amounted to misconduct involved legal and factual considerations about the definition of "misconduct" under Labor Law section 593. The Board's decision on this matter, deemed not irrational, is considered final. The decision was affirmed without costs, with concurrence from multiple judges.