In re Levy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re Levy

55 A.D.2d 725, 389 N.Y.S.2d 178, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15501

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

DecidedDecember 9, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 55 A.D.2d 725 (In re Levy) 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 Levy, 55 A.D.2d 725, 389 N.Y.S.2d 178, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15501 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 6, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner holding appellant, an attorney who retained public legal stenographers for temporary work, to be their employer, and assessing him as such for contributions in the sum of $450.78 for the audit period at issue. The issue of the existence of an employment relationship is factual and thus the board’s finding must be upheld if supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Electrolux Corp., 288 NY 440). In the instant case we cannot hold that as a matter of law such relationship has not been established (Matter of England [Levine], 38 NY2d 829). While appellant asserts, and it is apparently undisputed, that if he had paid the charges for the services of [726]*726the temporary legal stenographers he utilized to the agency that referred the personnel to him rather than directly to the personnel who in turn paid the agency, he would not be liable for the assessed contributions, this is not dispositive. At most it raised the possibility that a contrary interpretation might also be sustainable, and that, of course, is insufficient to mandate a reversal (Matter of England [Levine], supra, p 830). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 6, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner holding appellant, an attorney who retained public legal stenographers for temporary work, to be their employer, and assessing him as such for contributions in the sum of $450.78 for the audit period at issue. The issue of the existence of an employment relationship is factual and thus the board’s finding must be upheld if supported by substantial evidence (Matter of Electrolux Corp., 288 NY 440). In the instant case we cannot hold that as a matter of law such relationship has not been established (Matter of England [Levine], 38 NY2d 829). While appellant asserts, and it is apparently undisputed, that if he had paid the charges for the services of [726]*726the temporary legal stenographers he utilized to the agency that referred the personnel to him rather than directly to the personnel who in turn paid the agency, he would not be liable for the assessed contributions, this is not dispositive. At most it raised the possibility that a contrary interpretation might also be sustainable, and that, of course, is insufficient to mandate a reversal (Matter of England [Levine], supra, p 830). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 A.D.2d 725, 389 N.Y.S.2d 178, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15501, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-levy-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack