In re the Claim of Gbolo

272 A.D.2d 775, 708 N.Y.S.2d 649, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5722
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 18, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 272 A.D.2d 775 (In re the Claim of Gbolo) 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 Gbolo, 272 A.D.2d 775, 708 N.Y.S.2d 649, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5722 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 24, 1999, which denied claimant’s application to reopen a previous decision denying his application for unemployment insurance benefits.

After the initial determination of the local unemployment insurance office disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits, claimant requested a hearing, which he subsequently failed to attend. Based upon claimant’s default, the initial determination was sustained. Approximately 11 months later, claimant applied to reopen the decision. An Administrative Law Judge denied claimant’s application to reopen, and this decision was affirmed by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, prompting this appeal.

We affirm. It is well settled that whether to grant an application to reopen is a matter for the Board to decide in the exercise of its discretion and, absent an abuse of such discretion, the Board’s decision will not be disturbed (see, Matter of Sorge [Commissioner of Labor], 268 AD2d 668). The record, which includes claimant’s proffered excuses for his failure to attend the hearing, reveals no abuse of discretion in the Board’s denial of claimant’s application to reopen (see, Matter of Fruci [Commissioner of Labor], 260 AD2d 831, 832). The Board’s decision is, therefore, affirmed.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Spain, Carpinello and Rose, 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

Related

In re the Claim of Petrillo
308 A.D.2d 666 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re the Claim of Johnson
298 A.D.2d 756 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
In re the Claim of Mian
294 A.D.2d 699 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
In re the Claim of Martinez
288 A.D.2d 684 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
In re the Claim of Levine
287 A.D.2d 757 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
272 A.D.2d 775, 708 N.Y.S.2d 649, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5722, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-gbolo-nyappdiv-2000.