In re the Claim of Hellinger

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Hellinger

47 A.D.3d 1153, 850 N.Y.S.2d 690

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

DecidedJanuary 24, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.3d 1153 (In re the Claim of Hellinger) 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 Hellinger, 47 A.D.3d 1153, 850 N.Y.S.2d 690 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

[1154]*1154Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 4, 2006, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

By initial determination mailed February 15, 2006, claimant was, among other things, disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that her employment was terminated for misconduct. She requested a hearing on April 24, 2006. The Commissioner of Labor objected to the timeliness of the hearing request and this objection was later sustained by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. Claimant now appeals.

We affirm. Under Labor Law § 620 (1) (a), a request for a hearing must be made within 30 days of the mailing of the initial determination {see Matter of Dada [Commissioner of Labor], 41 AD3d 1079, 1080 [2007]; Matter of Alkovic [Gold Shield Sec. & Investigation, Inc. —Commissioner of Labor], 32 AD3d 1062, 1063 [2006]). Claimant requested a hearing well outside the 30-day time period stated on the initial determination and failed to provide a reasonable excuse for her omission. Therefore, the Board properly found that claimant’s request was untimely.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters, Spain and Kane, 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

[1154]*1154Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 4, 2006, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

By initial determination mailed February 15, 2006, claimant was, among other things, disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that her employment was terminated for misconduct. She requested a hearing on April 24, 2006. The Commissioner of Labor objected to the timeliness of the hearing request and this objection was later sustained by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board. Claimant now appeals.

We affirm. Under Labor Law § 620 (1) (a), a request for a hearing must be made within 30 days of the mailing of the initial determination {see Matter of Dada [Commissioner of Labor], 41 AD3d 1079, 1080 [2007]; Matter of Alkovic [Gold Shield Sec. & Investigation, Inc. —Commissioner of Labor], 32 AD3d 1062, 1063 [2006]). Claimant requested a hearing well outside the 30-day time period stated on the initial determination and failed to provide a reasonable excuse for her omission. Therefore, the Board properly found that claimant’s request was untimely.

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Peters, Spain and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.3d 1153, 850 N.Y.S.2d 690, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-hellinger-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack