In re the Claim of Banks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Banks

232 A.D.2d 797, 649 N.Y.S.2d 347, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10261

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 17, 1996·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 5, 1995, which dismissed claimant’s appeal from the decision of an Administrative Law Judge as untimely.

Following claimant’s failure to request a timely hearing with [798]*798respect to an initial determination finding him ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits, an Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter ALJ) sustained the Commissioner of Labor’s timeliness objection and continued the initial determination in effect. Nearly two years later, claimant sought to appeal the ALJ’s decision to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Board dismissed the appeal and sustained the ALJ’s decision. Given that the appeal was filed far beyond the statutory 20-day period contained in Labor Law § 621 (1) and that this provision is strictly enforced, we decline to disturb the Board’s decision (see, Matter of Barago [Hudacs], 207 AD2d 930; Matter of Kulawiak [Ross], 82 AD2d 1014).

Mercure, J. P., Casey, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, 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

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 5, 1995, which dismissed claimant’s appeal from the decision of an Administrative Law Judge as untimely.

Following claimant’s failure to request a timely hearing with [798]*798respect to an initial determination finding him ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits, an Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter ALJ) sustained the Commissioner of Labor’s timeliness objection and continued the initial determination in effect. Nearly two years later, claimant sought to appeal the ALJ’s decision to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. The Board dismissed the appeal and sustained the ALJ’s decision. Given that the appeal was filed far beyond the statutory 20-day period contained in Labor Law § 621 (1) and that this provision is strictly enforced, we decline to disturb the Board’s decision (see, Matter of Barago [Hudacs], 207 AD2d 930; Matter of Kulawiak [Ross], 82 AD2d 1014).

Mercure, J. P., Casey, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of Banks, 232 A.D.2d 797, 649 N.Y.S.2d 347, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10261 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

232 A.D.2d 797 (In re the Claim of Banks) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related