In re the Claim of Barago

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Barago

207 A.D.2d 930, 616 N.Y.S.2d 264, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8820

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

DecidedSeptember 15, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 207 A.D.2d 930 (In re the Claim of Barago) 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 Barago, 207 A.D.2d 930, 616 N.Y.S.2d 264, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8820 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 2, 1993, which dismissed claimant’s appeal from the decision of an Administrative Law Judge as untimely.

In our view, the evidence in the record concerning the circumstances and timing of claimant’s attempt to appeal from an adverse ruling of the Administrative Law Judge supplied a rational basis for the Board’s finding of untimeliness. The Board did not exceed its powers by failing to credit claimant’s explanation for the delay. In light of the explicit provisions of Labor Law § 621 (1) regarding the timeliness of appeals, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s determination.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, 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 March 2, 1993, which dismissed claimant’s appeal from the decision of an Administrative Law Judge as untimely.

In our view, the evidence in the record concerning the circumstances and timing of claimant’s attempt to appeal from an adverse ruling of the Administrative Law Judge supplied a rational basis for the Board’s finding of untimeliness. The Board did not exceed its powers by failing to credit claimant’s explanation for the delay. In light of the explicit provisions of Labor Law § 621 (1) regarding the timeliness of appeals, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s determination.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 930, 616 N.Y.S.2d 264, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8820, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-barago-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack