In re the Claim of Hightower

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Hightower

169 A.D.2d 922, 564 N.Y.S.2d 641, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 117

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 10, 1991·Published

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 29, 1989, which ruled [923] that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant admitted that although she knew of the 30-day time limitation for requesting a hearing on the initial determination denying her unemployment insurance benefits, she failed to request such a hearing until after the expiration of that time period (see, Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]). The only excuse proffered by claimant was that she was waiting for the outcome of her union arbitration. Under these circumstances, the conclusion that her request was untimely and that her excuse was not valid, thus continuing in effect the initial denial of benefits, was in all respects proper (see, Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]; Matter of Gavin [Levine], 52 AD2d 1006).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., 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 December 29, 1989, which ruled [923] that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because her employment was terminated due to misconduct.

Claimant admitted that although she knew of the 30-day time limitation for requesting a hearing on the initial determination denying her unemployment insurance benefits, she failed to request such a hearing until after the expiration of that time period (see, Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]). The only excuse proffered by claimant was that she was waiting for the outcome of her union arbitration. Under these circumstances, the conclusion that her request was untimely and that her excuse was not valid, thus continuing in effect the initial denial of benefits, was in all respects proper (see, Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]; Matter of Gavin [Levine], 52 AD2d 1006).

Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Casey, Weiss, Mikoll and Yesawich, Jr., JJ., concur.

In re the Claim of Hightower, 169 A.D.2d 922, 564 N.Y.S.2d 641, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 117 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

169 A.D.2d 922 (In re the Claim of Hightower) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related