In re the Claim of Delgado

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Delgado

10 A.D.3d 840, 781 N.Y.S.2d 922, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11162

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 10 A.D.3d 840 (In re the Claim of Delgado) 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 Delgado, 10 A.D.3d 840, 781 N.Y.S.2d 922, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11162 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 29, 2003, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive additional unemployment insurance benefits under Labor Law § 599.

In May 2002, claimant was initially approved for additional unemployment insurance benefits pursuant to Labor Law § 599 while enrolled in a hospitality management program. Thereafter, the Department of Labor withdrew its approval because claimant’s spring 2003 schedule consisted of only 10 hours per week of her physical presence in a structured classroom instruction setting. In order to be eligible for additional training benefits pursuant to Labor Law § 599, a claimant must attend an approved training course or program for at least 12 hours in each week (see 12 NYCRR 482.2 [b]). Inasmuch as the record confirms that claimant failed to meet the minimum required hours of classroom instruction for the spring 2003 semester, substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemploy[841]*841ment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant was ineligible to receive additional unemployment insurance benefits (see Matter of Lohmann [Commissioner of Labor], 6 AD3d 916 [2004]).

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, 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 September 29, 2003, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive additional unemployment insurance benefits under Labor Law § 599.

In May 2002, claimant was initially approved for additional unemployment insurance benefits pursuant to Labor Law § 599 while enrolled in a hospitality management program. Thereafter, the Department of Labor withdrew its approval because claimant’s spring 2003 schedule consisted of only 10 hours per week of her physical presence in a structured classroom instruction setting. In order to be eligible for additional training benefits pursuant to Labor Law § 599, a claimant must attend an approved training course or program for at least 12 hours in each week (see 12 NYCRR 482.2 [b]). Inasmuch as the record confirms that claimant failed to meet the minimum required hours of classroom instruction for the spring 2003 semester, substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemploy[841]*841ment Insurance Appeal Board ruling that claimant was ineligible to receive additional unemployment insurance benefits (see Matter of Lohmann [Commissioner of Labor], 6 AD3d 916 [2004]).

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 A.D.3d 840, 781 N.Y.S.2d 922, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-delgado-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack