In re the Claim of Baker

260 A.D.2d 887, 688 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4243
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 22, 1999
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 260 A.D.2d 887 (In re the Claim of Baker) 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 the Claim of Baker, 260 A.D.2d 887, 688 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4243 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 4, 1998, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she failed to comply with registration requirements.

Although claimant’s employment as a sales associate ended the last week of December 1997, she did not apply for unemployment insurance benefits until February 6, 1998. Claimant ultimately was found by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to be ineligible to receive benefits effective December 29, 1997 through February 1, 1998 because she failed to comply with reporting requirements for that period. We affirm. “Certifying for benefits in accordance with the Labor Law and the applicable regulations is a necessary prerequisite to eligibility for benefits” (Matter of Prieto [Commissioner of Labor], 255 AD2d 859, 860 [citation omitted]). While a deficiency in this regard can be excused where good cause is demonstrated (see, id.), we find substantial evidence to support the Board’s decision that claimant did not make such a showing here. Although claimant testified that she did not immediately file for benefits for a variety of reasons, the record reflects that claimant made no attempt to contact the local unemployment insurance office for instructions as to when and how to file her claim. Under the circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision.

[888]*888Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

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

Related

In re the Claim of Larkin
12 A.D.3d 829 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
In re the Claim of Chen
307 A.D.2d 580 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re the Claim of Del Vecchio
288 A.D.2d 548 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
In re the Claim of Foertsch
272 A.D.2d 739 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
260 A.D.2d 887, 688 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4243, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-baker-nyappdiv-1999.