In re the Claim of Blitstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Blitstein

50 A.D.2d 690, 375 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12537

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

DecidedNovember 26, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 A.D.2d 690 (In re the Claim of Blitstein) 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 Blitstein, 50 A.D.2d 690, 375 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12537 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board filed December 5, 1974, which reversed the decision of the referee and sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner holding claimant ineligible because she was not available for employment. The record presented a factual issue as to whether or not claimant’s efforts toward employment were of sufficient diligence and vigor to satisfy the statutory requirement of availability. Such a determination is to be made by the board, and its determination must be sustained if it is rendered upon substantial evidence (Matter of Bennett [Catherwood], 33 AD2d 946). We find such evidence in this record. Decision affirmed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Koreman, Main and Larkin, JJ., concur.

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 December 5, 1974, which reversed the decision of the referee and sustained the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner holding claimant ineligible because she was not available for employment. The record presented a factual issue as to whether or not claimant’s efforts toward employment were of sufficient diligence and vigor to satisfy the statutory requirement of availability. Such a determination is to be made by the board, and its determination must be sustained if it is rendered upon substantial evidence (Matter of Bennett [Catherwood], 33 AD2d 946). We find such evidence in this record. Decision affirmed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Koreman, Main and Larkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 690, 375 N.Y.S.2d 469, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12537, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-blitstein-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack