In re the Claim of Davis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Davis

192 A.D.2d 1000, 597 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4405

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

DecidedApril 29, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 192 A.D.2d 1000 (In re the Claim of Davis) 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 Davis, 192 A.D.2d 1000, 597 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4405 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 24, 1992, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

The record evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge’s decision that he was without authority to entertain claimant’s case because claimant failed to timely request a hearing (see, Matter of Bush [Levine], 53 AD2d 768). Claimant admitted that he received the initial determination denying his claim for unemployment insurance benefits "around” the time of its mailing on October 28, 1991. He did not request a hearing until January 17, 1992, long after the statutory 30-day period for doing so had expired (Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]). Claimant testified that he could not read. There is no evidence in the record, however, that claimant ever notified anyone of that fact or that he ever attempted to have anyone read to him any portion of the notice of determination (see, Matter of Perez [Catherwood] 24 AD2d 776). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

Weiss, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Levine and Crew III, 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 June 24, 1992, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

The record evidence supports the Administrative Law Judge’s decision that he was without authority to entertain claimant’s case because claimant failed to timely request a hearing (see, Matter of Bush [Levine], 53 AD2d 768). Claimant admitted that he received the initial determination denying his claim for unemployment insurance benefits "around” the time of its mailing on October 28, 1991. He did not request a hearing until January 17, 1992, long after the statutory 30-day period for doing so had expired (Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]). Claimant testified that he could not read. There is no evidence in the record, however, that claimant ever notified anyone of that fact or that he ever attempted to have anyone read to him any portion of the notice of determination (see, Matter of Perez [Catherwood] 24 AD2d 776). Claimant’s remaining contentions have been considered and rejected as lacking in merit.

Weiss, P. J., Mikoll, Yesawich Jr., Levine and Crew III, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 A.D.2d 1000, 597 N.Y.S.2d 222, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-davis-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack