In re the Claim of Johnston

253 A.D.2d 949, 678 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9500
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedSeptember 17, 1998
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 253 A.D.2d 949 (In re the Claim of Johnston) 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 Johnston, 253 A.D.2d 949, 678 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9500 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 6, 1997, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling, inter alia, that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she was not totally unemployed.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding, inter alia, that claimant was not totally unemployed during part of the period she was collecting unemployment insurance benefits. Claimant became president and sole shareholder of a corporation during the relevant time period. Although claimant’s activities on behalf of [950]*950the corporation (which included writing checks and entering into a contract for sale) were minimal and unprofitable, this does not preclude a finding that claimant was not totally unemployed and that she stood to gain financially from the continued operation of the business (see, Matter of Brooke [Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 910; Matter of Bannin [Sweeney], 247 AD2d 736). Furthermore, inasmuch as claimant failed to disclose her corporate activities when certifying for benefits, the Board’s finding that claimant made willful false statements and its assessment of a recoverable overpayment are supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Murak [Sweeney], 244 AD2d 751). Claimant’s remaining contentions, including bias on the part of the Administrative Law Judge and the effective date of her disqualification, have been reviewed and found to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Spain, Carpinello and Graffeo, 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

Related

In re the Claim of McVey
42 A.D.3d 796 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
In re the Claim of Kansu
36 A.D.3d 1185 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
In re the Claim of Sharon
12 A.D.3d 1018 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
In re the Claim of Battaglia
8 A.D.3d 937 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
In re the Claim of Albarella
307 A.D.2d 573 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re the Claim of Helm
304 A.D.2d 943 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re the Claim of Alm
302 A.D.2d 777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re the Claim of Bundschuh
288 A.D.2d 745 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
In re the Claim of Schenker
284 A.D.2d 765 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
In re the Claim of Hocker
275 A.D.2d 847 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Santo
274 A.D.2d 816 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Singh
273 A.D.2d 765 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Lortz
269 A.D.2d 723 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Kazin
267 A.D.2d 581 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
In re the Claim of Halper
262 A.D.2d 848 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
In re the Claim of Stasko
262 A.D.2d 701 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
In re the Claim of Greenbaum
257 A.D.2d 931 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
253 A.D.2d 949, 678 N.Y.S.2d 160, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-johnston-nyappdiv-1998.