In re the Claim of Jiminez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Jiminez

242 A.D.2d 769, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1008, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8518

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 4, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment In[770] sur anee Appeal Board, filed March 7, 1996, which charged claimant with a recoverable overpayment of unemployment insurance benefits.

The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s assessment of a $10,500 recoverable overpayment is supported by substantial evidence given an Administrative Law Judge’s prior decision finding claimant ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was unavailable for work (see, Labor Law § 597 [4]). To the extent that claimant attempts to argue the merits of the prior decision finding him ineligible to receive benefits, we note that such issue is not properly before this Court inasmuch as the Board dismissed petitioner’s appeal from the Administrative Law Judge’s decision as untimely.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters and Spain, 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 In[770] sur anee Appeal Board, filed March 7, 1996, which charged claimant with a recoverable overpayment of unemployment insurance benefits.

The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s assessment of a $10,500 recoverable overpayment is supported by substantial evidence given an Administrative Law Judge’s prior decision finding claimant ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was unavailable for work (see, Labor Law § 597 [4]). To the extent that claimant attempts to argue the merits of the prior decision finding him ineligible to receive benefits, we note that such issue is not properly before this Court inasmuch as the Board dismissed petitioner’s appeal from the Administrative Law Judge’s decision as untimely.

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

In re the Claim of Jiminez, 242 A.D.2d 769, 661 N.Y.S.2d 1008, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8518 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

242 A.D.2d 769 (In re the Claim of Jiminez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related