In re the Claim of Barnes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Barnes

216 A.D.2d 619, 627 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5836

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 1, 1995·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 24, 1993, which ruled that claimant was entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits.

Claimant, a fashion model, was found by the Board to be an employee of USA Models, Inc., a modeling agency, and not an independent contractor. The agency asserts that the Board’s finding was error because the agency did not maintain the requisite degree of control over claimant. The record, however, reveals that the agency, among other things, coordinated claimant’s work schedule, negotiated with clients on claimant’s behalf, instructed claimant on the appropriate dress and behavior, and received a portion of claimant’s modeling fees. In view of this, we find that the Board’s decision that claimant was not an independent contractor is supported by substantial evidence.

Cardona, P. J., White, Casey, 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

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 24, 1993, which ruled that claimant was entitled to receive unemployment insurance benefits.

Claimant, a fashion model, was found by the Board to be an employee of USA Models, Inc., a modeling agency, and not an independent contractor. The agency asserts that the Board’s finding was error because the agency did not maintain the requisite degree of control over claimant. The record, however, reveals that the agency, among other things, coordinated claimant’s work schedule, negotiated with clients on claimant’s behalf, instructed claimant on the appropriate dress and behavior, and received a portion of claimant’s modeling fees. In view of this, we find that the Board’s decision that claimant was not an independent contractor is supported by substantial evidence.

Cardona, P. J., White, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

In re the Claim of Barnes, 216 A.D.2d 619, 627 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

216 A.D.2d 619 (In re the Claim of Barnes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related