In re the Claim of Bennitt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Bennitt

285 A.D.2d 777, 727 N.Y.S.2d 664, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7415

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

DecidedJuly 12, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 285 A.D.2d 777 (In re the Claim of Bennitt) 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 Bennitt, 285 A.D.2d 777, 727 N.Y.S.2d 664, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7415 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 11, 2000, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling, inter alia, that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

By initial determination dated and mailed September 9, 1999, claimant was informed that he was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct. Claimant [778]*778admitted receiving the determination shortly after it was mailed but did not request a hearing until November 29, 1999. Inasmuch as claimant did not offer a reasonable excuse for failing to request an administrative hearing within the 30-day statutory time period set forth in Labor Law § 620 (1) (a), we find no reason to disturb the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely (see, Matter of Munns [Commissioner of Labor], 271 AD2d 740; Matter of Mostafa [Commissioner of Labor], 265 AD2d 793). Claimant’s assertion that the determination failed to clearly convey information concerning the deadline for filing an appeal has been examined and found to be without merit.

Peters, J. P., Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Rose, 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 April 11, 2000, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling, inter alia, that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

By initial determination dated and mailed September 9, 1999, claimant was informed that he was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct. Claimant [778]*778admitted receiving the determination shortly after it was mailed but did not request a hearing until November 29, 1999. Inasmuch as claimant did not offer a reasonable excuse for failing to request an administrative hearing within the 30-day statutory time period set forth in Labor Law § 620 (1) (a), we find no reason to disturb the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely (see, Matter of Munns [Commissioner of Labor], 271 AD2d 740; Matter of Mostafa [Commissioner of Labor], 265 AD2d 793). Claimant’s assertion that the determination failed to clearly convey information concerning the deadline for filing an appeal has been examined and found to be without merit.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D.2d 777, 727 N.Y.S.2d 664, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-bennitt-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack