In re the Claim of Barkley

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Barkley

274 A.D.2d 717, 710 N.Y.S.2d 468

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

DecidedJuly 13, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 274 A.D.2d 717 (In re the Claim of Barkley) 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 Barkley, 274 A.D.2d 717, 710 N.Y.S.2d 468 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 23, 1999, which ruled that the employer’s request for a hearing was untimely.

By initial decision dated and mailed July 24, 1998, claimant was held eligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits. The employer requested a hearing to challenge the determination by letter postmarked March 10, 1999. The request was granted and, ultimately, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that the employer had failed to timely request a hearing. An employer has a 30-day period within which to request a hearing pursuant to Labor Law § 620 (2). The employer contends that its delay in requesting a hearing was the result of being short staffed. Even accepting the employer’s excuse, we note that the relevant statute contains no provision for extending the 30-day deadline when it is the employer who requests the hearing (see, Matter of Davino [Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr. — Hudacs], 210 AD2d 778). Accordingly, we find no reason to disturb the decision of the Board that the employer’s initial request for a hearing was untimely (see, Matter of Storch, 244 AD2d 755).

Mercure, J. P., Peters, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, 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 September 23, 1999, which ruled that the employer’s request for a hearing was untimely.

By initial decision dated and mailed July 24, 1998, claimant was held eligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits. The employer requested a hearing to challenge the determination by letter postmarked March 10, 1999. The request was granted and, ultimately, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that the employer had failed to timely request a hearing. An employer has a 30-day period within which to request a hearing pursuant to Labor Law § 620 (2). The employer contends that its delay in requesting a hearing was the result of being short staffed. Even accepting the employer’s excuse, we note that the relevant statute contains no provision for extending the 30-day deadline when it is the employer who requests the hearing (see, Matter of Davino [Good Samaritan Hosp. Med. Ctr. — Hudacs], 210 AD2d 778). Accordingly, we find no reason to disturb the decision of the Board that the employer’s initial request for a hearing was untimely (see, Matter of Storch, 244 AD2d 755).

Mercure, J. P., Peters, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

274 A.D.2d 717, 710 N.Y.S.2d 468, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-barkley-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack