In re Imperial Investing Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Imperial Investing Corp.

30 A.D.2d 750, 291 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3607

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 27, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 750 (In re Imperial Investing Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In re Imperial Investing Corp., 30 A.D.2d 750, 291 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3607 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Herlihy, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board granting the employer’s application to reopen and reconsider a prior decision and affirming a determination assessing to the employer additional contributions. It appears that approximately one year before the determination, changes had taken place in the operation of the employer’s real estate business and that the president and principal stockholder of the corporation took over the duties and responsibilities of operating the building owned by the corporation. His usual business was that of an attorney but separate from that professional responsibility, he undertook to operate the building by collecting rents, paying obligations, hiring and firing employees and assuming the entire responsibility for the maintenance and operation of the property “ on the executive level ”, which also included preparation and filing of tax returns, making investments, et cetera. He was paid commissions for such work based upon recognized real estate rates in the locality. The employer contends that the duties of its officer were those of an independent contractor, but the factual findings by the board are supported by substantial evidence and which determination is solely within the province of the board. There are legal precedents in somewhat similar factual situations which support the board’s determination. (Matter of Tri-Reme Realty Corp. [Corsi], 269 App. Div. 872, affd. 296 N. Y. 566; Matter of Dybdal [Corsi], 274 App. Div. 1084; Matter of Empirt 207 Fed. Credit Union [Catherwood], 28 AD 2d 1189.) Decision affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Herlihy, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Herlihy, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board granting the employer’s application to reopen and reconsider a prior decision and affirming a determination assessing to the employer additional contributions. It appears that approximately one year before the determination, changes had taken place in the operation of the employer’s real estate business and that the president and principal stockholder of the corporation took over the duties and responsibilities of operating the building owned by the corporation. His usual business was that of an attorney but separate from that professional responsibility, he undertook to operate the building by collecting rents, paying obligations, hiring and firing employees and assuming the entire responsibility for the maintenance and operation of the property “ on the executive level ”, which also included preparation and filing of tax returns, making investments, et cetera. He was paid commissions for such work based upon recognized real estate rates in the locality. The employer contends that the duties of its officer were those of an independent contractor, but the factual findings by the board are supported by substantial evidence and which determination is solely within the province of the board. There are legal precedents in somewhat similar factual situations which support the board’s determination. (Matter of Tri-Reme Realty Corp. [Corsi], 269 App. Div. 872, affd. 296 N. Y. 566; Matter of Dybdal [Corsi], 274 App. Div. 1084; Matter of Empirt 207 Fed. Credit Union [Catherwood], 28 AD 2d 1189.) Decision affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Herlihy, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 750, 291 N.Y.S.2d 712, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-imperial-investing-corp-nyappdiv-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack