In re the Claim of Einterz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Einterz

165 A.D.2d 943

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 1990

StatusPublished

This text of 165 A.D.2d 943 (In re the Claim of Einterz) 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 Einterz, 165 A.D.2d 943 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 31, 1989, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its original decision dismissing claimant’s appeal as untimely.

The decision of the Administrative Law Judge disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits was filed on September 6, 1988. Although the decision was mailed to claimant that same day, she failed to file an appeal until January 24, 1989. Since the record clearly establishes that claimant’s appeal to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was not filed within the 20-day period mandated by statute (Labor Law § 621 [1]), the Board properly dismissed her appeal as untimely (see, Matter of Kulawiak [Ross], 82 AD2d 1014). As such, the merits of claimant’s appeal are not properly before this court.

Decision affirmed, without costs.

Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, 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 May 31, 1989, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its original decision dismissing claimant’s appeal as untimely.

The decision of the Administrative Law Judge disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits was filed on September 6, 1988. Although the decision was mailed to claimant that same day, she failed to file an appeal until January 24, 1989. Since the record clearly establishes that claimant’s appeal to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was not filed within the 20-day period mandated by statute (Labor Law § 621 [1]), the Board properly dismissed her appeal as untimely (see, Matter of Kulawiak [Ross], 82 AD2d 1014). As such, the merits of claimant’s appeal are not properly before this court.

Decision affirmed, without costs.

Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 A.D.2d 943, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-einterz-nyappdiv-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack