In re the Claim of Capron

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Capron

244 A.D.2d 698, 664 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11492

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

DecidedNovember 13, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 698 (In re the Claim of Capron) 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 Capron, 244 A.D.2d 698, 664 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11492 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 4, 1995, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

It is undisputed that claimant failed to comply with the requirements of Labor Law § 620 (1) (a) by requesting an administrative hearing either in person or in writing within 30 days after issuance of the notice of decision by the local unemployment insurance office. Claimant admitted that she had received the notice of decision and that the delay was not the result of any “physical condition or mental incapacity” on her part (Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]). Under these circumstances, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was without authority to review the initial determination finding that claimant was ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits because she was not totally unemployed and charging her with a recoverable overpayment and the loss of benefit days. The Board’s decision to that effect is, accordingly, affirmed (see, [699]*699Matter of Moricone [New York Hosp. (Cornell Med. Ctr.)—Hadacs], 199 AD2d 802).

Crew III, J. P., White, Yesawich Jr., Spain and Carpinello, 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 May 4, 1995, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

It is undisputed that claimant failed to comply with the requirements of Labor Law § 620 (1) (a) by requesting an administrative hearing either in person or in writing within 30 days after issuance of the notice of decision by the local unemployment insurance office. Claimant admitted that she had received the notice of decision and that the delay was not the result of any “physical condition or mental incapacity” on her part (Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]). Under these circumstances, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was without authority to review the initial determination finding that claimant was ineligible for unemployment insurance benefits because she was not totally unemployed and charging her with a recoverable overpayment and the loss of benefit days. The Board’s decision to that effect is, accordingly, affirmed (see, [699]*699Matter of Moricone [New York Hosp. (Cornell Med. Ctr.)—Hadacs], 199 AD2d 802).

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 698, 664 N.Y.S.2d 192, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-capron-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack