In re the Claim of Harris

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Harris

51 A.D.2d 605, 377 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10920

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

DecidedJanuary 8, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 51 A.D.2d 605 (In re the Claim of Harris) 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 Harris, 51 A.D.2d 605, 377 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10920 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 11, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner ruling claimant ineligible to receive benefits because she was not totally unemployed; charging her with an overpayment of $2,281.25 in benefits; and declaring a forfeiture of 248 effective days of future benefits as a penalty for willfully making false statements to obtain benefits. Claimant is the president and 80% stockholder of a corporation owning an apartment house complex consisting of some 13 year-round apartments. The record of the hearings herein supports the determination that during the periods here in issue she was actually engaged in the operation. and management of the corporation of which she was president. In all respects, the determination of the board is supported by substantial evidence, and, accordingly, must be affirmed (Matter of Schatzberg [Cather-wood], 32 AD2d 710; Matter of Wersba [Catherwood], 27 AD2d 890; Matter of Newman [Catherwood], 24 AD2d 1042). Decision affirmed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Main, Larkin an Reynolds, 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 August 11, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining the initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner ruling claimant ineligible to receive benefits because she was not totally unemployed; charging her with an overpayment of $2,281.25 in benefits; and declaring a forfeiture of 248 effective days of future benefits as a penalty for willfully making false statements to obtain benefits. Claimant is the president and 80% stockholder of a corporation owning an apartment house complex consisting of some 13 year-round apartments. The record of the hearings herein supports the determination that during the periods here in issue she was actually engaged in the operation. and management of the corporation of which she was president. In all respects, the determination of the board is supported by substantial evidence, and, accordingly, must be affirmed (Matter of Schatzberg [Cather-wood], 32 AD2d 710; Matter of Wersba [Catherwood], 27 AD2d 890; Matter of Newman [Catherwood], 24 AD2d 1042). Decision affirmed, without costs. Sweeney, J. P., Kane, Main, Larkin an Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 605, 377 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10920, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-harris-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack