Rodman v. New Mexico Employment Security Department, 764 P.2d 1316 (N.M. 1988).
Facts: Ms. Rodman was an employee of Presbyterian Hospital for nearly eight years as a unit secretary. On February 17, 1987, the appellant was terminated under hospital personnel policies following a “third corrective action” notice. Ms. Rodman was reprimanded in June of 1986 in light of receiving an inordinate number of personal calls and visitors at her work station. The formal reprimand set forth conditions to prevent further corrective action. The conditions were as follows: no personal telephone calls during work hours outside of a designated break or dinner time, these are to occur in an area not visible to patients, physicians, or other
…show more content…
Rodman agrees to meet the boyfriend downstairs. When claimant left her area she notified a co-worker, as her supervisor was on lunch, she then notifies the security guard, and asks him to meet her in the lobby.
When Ms. Rodman arrived in the lobby the boyfriend started to make a scene and forced her outside. As a result the claimant’s shirt had tore. At which point the security guard arrives to find the two (claimant, and claimant’s boyfriend) arguing and inside her car. The security guard instructed the boyfriend to give
Ms. Rodman her keys back, the boyfriend jumps into the driver’s seat, locks the doors, and drive off.
Thirty-Five minutes later Ms. Rodman returns to proceed with her shift, where telephone calls continue.
The supervisor, frustrated sends Ms. Rodman home, shortly after the claimant is terminated.
Issue: The issue in question is whether the misconduct which warranted termination from employment rose to the level of misconduct which would warrant denial of unemployment compensation under NMSA 1978, Section 51-1-7 of the Unemployment Compensation Law. Rule: Meaning of “misconduct” under New Mexico’s Unemployment Compensation Law is not to be given a too broad meaning. As defined in Mitchell v. Lovington Good Samaritan Center, Inc., 89
N.M. 575,577,555 P.2d 696,698 (1976): “ Misconduct” is limited to conduct envincing such wilful or wanton disregard of an
First of all, I would like to inform you that the HR Department has received the detailed complaint she has submitted regarding the inappropriate behavior of the bellmen.
The case filed by NLRB was between the American Medical Response of Connecticut in New Haven and one of their employees called Mrs. Dawnmarie. Upon verbal disagreement with her supervisor, Mrs. Dawnmarie posted a negative remark on her private facebook wall about the supervisor. The remark attracted comments from her staff mates. On reporting to work the following day, she was suspended and later fired. The company argued that her act was a violation of their internet policy by criticizing her overseer online.
and finds Anita sitting on his porch waiting for him. They sit down at the kitchen table and she
On 3/13/16 SO EMT Perez was notified that an engine had come on campus. SO EMT Cunningham responded along with SO EMT Perez and caught up with the engine by lakeside commons. The driver of the engine stated that he was responding for a lift assist to 3144/3146 apt 220 but that he wasn’t sure which one he was going too. SO EMT Cunningham and SO EMT Perez decided to respond to FR-220 first being that they were the engine came from gate 2 and they were closest to that building. SO EMT Perez and SO EMT Cunningham knocked and announce their presence at FR-220’s door and were both verbally invited in. The resident a Mrs. Helen Neff stated that she could not get out of her chair because it was stuck and needed help getting out of it. SO EMT Perez
The front desk assistant has been texting while checking in patients and was not answering the phones. I took the assistant out to the side for a moment and asked if there was an emergency. The assistant said no, and I kindly reminded her that having cellphones out while working is a HIPAA violation. The assistant told me she has a hard time juggling both patients and phones. I coached her to take care of the patients first and if the phone rings, to answer it and ask if they could hold for a minute. I will be checking in with the assistant more often to see her progress.
Police involvement was necessary since security was unable to assist that night; security services are complementary since the guard must service all three of Ms. Miner’s complexes, thus encouraging the use of police with emergency situations. Ms. Miner was uneasy when she learned about the assault and personally emailed the Plaintiff to inquire about her condition and to clarify that damages to the unit be repaired. Yet, Plaintiff responded by placing the blame on her ex-boyfriend for the damage, claiming that he wasn’t a guest (Exhibit 7); nonetheless, Plaintiff reluctantly paid $2500 for repair costs
THE COURT SHOULD FIND THAT THE SEARCHING OFFICERS WERE UNREASONABLE IN THEIR BELIEF THAT HIS COTENANT HAD APPARENT AUTHORITY TO CONSENT TO THE SEARCH BECAUSE HER ANSWERS TO THEIR QUESTIONS CREATED AMBIGUITY AND THEY DID NOT RESOLVE THAT AMBIGUITY.
Diamond quickly became quite hostile towards her, she began to yell and scream at Christie. At this time, Charity a regular client at ASK, happened to walk into the office. She walked in and saw Diamond yelling and walking towards the receptionist area. Charity saw this as a threatening encounter about to happen and she tried to get Diamond’s attention. She yelled at Diamond, tried to get her to stop and said she would have to call the police, if she continued. The threat of calling the police only further enraged Diamond and she attacked Charity. Diamond lunged at Charity from across the room and proceeded to punch her in the face and push her to the ground. The two girls struggled on the ground as Charity pushed Diamond off of her and tried to stand up again. By the time this had happened and Diamond’s attention was focused elsewhere, Christie had the time to call the security guard Bill. Bill rushed to the receptionist area and pulled both girls apart before any further serious injuries could
of the upper windows in the apartment house, a man called down: ‘Let that girl alone!’”
Ms. Crook was involved in a verbal altercation with a client while in the cafeteria during dinner on _____. Staff tried intervening to de-escalade the issue and Ms. Crook declined the assistance from staff. Ms. Crook continued to exchange words with the client. Program Manager entered the cafeteria and was called via-radio by Ms. Crook. Program Manager responded and proceeded to walk out the cafeteria and was met by Ms. Crook. Ms. Crook tried explaining the issue at hand; Program Manager encouraged her to discontinue the conservation due to clients being present. Ms. Crook continued explaining her side and Program Manager encouraged Ms. Crook to return to the program and sit in the kitchen. Program Manager then proceeded to take clients to
Respondent states that on December 3, 2016, she arrived at the property and knocked on Complainants’ door. Atiya opened the door and invited her to sit down. Respondent told Atiya that she did not want to sit down because it would be a short chat. Respondent states that she read Atiya the text message from Santoro while Atiya insisted that she sit down. Respondent informed Atiya that she received complaints from tenants about last three night’s noise and that the tenant downstairs was now afraid of them because she heard men yelling, crying, shouting in a foreign language and banging on doors. Respondent states that she met with Atiya about respecting the other tenants after three days and nights of havoc which awakened and frightened the other tenants
On August 8, 2016, you were coached by Custodial Supervisor, Teresa Renteria, for taking an unauthorized break when she walked in Edmund J. Cain Hall at 9:30 PM and found you sitting down and reading a book on an electronic device while your coworker was shampooing the floor. Mrs. Renteria instructed you to go back to work and informed you that disciplinary action will occur if you were found taking additional unauthorized breaks in the future. You acknowledged that you understood her directions by replying with, ‘got it’.
With this she makes the decision to leave and request him never to talk to her again.
After having driven only a kilometre with the meter indicating a debt of $7.90, the complainant became aware that the two passengers, Drobny and Levy, had no way of paying for the taxi fare. When the complainant indicated he would take them to a police station, both Drobny and Levy began swearing and cursing. Once they arrived at the station, the complainant made a statement saying this was the proper place for Drobny and Levy, to which Drobny then initiated a tackle on the complainant and grabbed his legs causing him to topple over onto the ground resulting in pain and bruising to the complainant’s thighs.
g. Failure to notify HISD of a change in the Fellow’s name, address, telephone number or school enrollment status;