In re the Claim of Khurgin

232 A.D.2d 707, 648 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10079
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 10, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 232 A.D.2d 707 (In re the Claim of Khurgin) 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 Khurgin, 232 A.D.2d 707, 648 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10079 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 13, 1995, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.

Claimant continued to receive unemployment insurance benefits after he formed his own corporation. The Board subsequently found that claimant was ineligible to receive benefits because he was not totally unemployed. In addition, the Board charged claimant with a recoverable overpayment of benefits in the amount of $6,900. Claimant appeals from the Board’s decision, arguing, inter alia, that it is not supported by the evidence in the record. Based upon our review of the record, we find this claim to be without merit.

Claimant testified that he formed the corporation for the purpose of exporting products from the United States to Russia. He was the president of the corporation and invested $6,000 to start the business. He also established a corporate checking account. Claimant stated that he made telephone calls to Russia to find potential buyers of American goods and that he sent and received faxes for the same purpose. He further stated that he contacted suppliers in the United States who were interested in exporting products to Russia. Notwithstanding the fact that the corporation was not profitable, claimant’s activities on behalf of the corporation provide [708]*708substantial evidence supporting the Board’s finding that he was not totally unemployed (see, Matter of Schmerzler [Sweeney], 226 AD2d 853; Matter of Czarniak [Ross], 60 AD2d 745). We have considered claimant’s remaining contentions and find them to be unavailing.

Cardona, P. J., Yesawich Jr., Peters, Spain and Carpinello, 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 Bessy
57 A.D.3d 1048 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
In re the Claim of Kim
253 A.D.2d 966 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
In re the Claim of Fitton
239 A.D.2d 723 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
In re the Claim of Roland
239 A.D.2d 694 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
232 A.D.2d 707, 648 N.Y.S.2d 479, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10079, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-khurgin-nyappdiv-1996.