In re the Claim of Glynn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Glynn

211 A.D.2d 938, 621 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 223

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

DecidedJanuary 12, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 211 A.D.2d 938 (In re the Claim of Glynn) 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 Glynn, 211 A.D.2d 938, 621 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 223 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 22, 1994, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

Claimant failed to request a hearing within the 30-day time period set forth in Labor Law § 620 (1) (a). Claimant never argued that he failed to receive a copy of the local office’s decision disqualifying him from receiving benefits or that he did not timely receive a copy of that decision. In addition, there was no evidence of any physical condition or mental incapacity which prevented him from making a timely hearing request. The rejection of the excuses proffered by claimant was in all respects proper. Given the facts of this case, the Board correctly sustained the Administrative Law Judge’s determination that he was without authority to rule on the merits of claimant’s case.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., 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 March 22, 1994, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

Claimant failed to request a hearing within the 30-day time period set forth in Labor Law § 620 (1) (a). Claimant never argued that he failed to receive a copy of the local office’s decision disqualifying him from receiving benefits or that he did not timely receive a copy of that decision. In addition, there was no evidence of any physical condition or mental incapacity which prevented him from making a timely hearing request. The rejection of the excuses proffered by claimant was in all respects proper. Given the facts of this case, the Board correctly sustained the Administrative Law Judge’s determination that he was without authority to rule on the merits of claimant’s case.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, White, Casey and Yesawich Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 A.D.2d 938, 621 N.Y.S.2d 948, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-glynn-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack