In re the Claim of Klabin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Klabin

30 A.D.2d 1005, 294 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3116

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 30 A.D.2d 1005 (In re the Claim of Klabin) 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 Klabin, 30 A.D.2d 1005, 294 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3116 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Gabrielli, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 30, 1967, which denied appellant’s application for the reopening and reconsideration of its decision of March 23, 1963. An examination of the record discloses neither any new evidence to be considered by the board nor any showing that it overlooked or misapprehended any matter of fact or law. For over a period of some four years claimant, who was represented by counsel, failed to perfect any appeal from the decision he seeks to have reopened and, upon the facts and circumstances here presented, we cannot say that the board abused its discretion. (Matter of Crowley [Corsi], 275 App. Div. 977.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Gabrielli, J.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Gabrielli, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 30, 1967, which denied appellant’s application for the reopening and reconsideration of its decision of March 23, 1963. An examination of the record discloses neither any new evidence to be considered by the board nor any showing that it overlooked or misapprehended any matter of fact or law. For over a period of some four years claimant, who was represented by counsel, failed to perfect any appeal from the decision he seeks to have reopened and, upon the facts and circumstances here presented, we cannot say that the board abused its discretion. (Matter of Crowley [Corsi], 275 App. Div. 977.) Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Staley, Jr., and Gabrielli, JJ., concur in memorandum by Gabrielli, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 A.D.2d 1005, 294 N.Y.S.2d 199, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-klabin-nyappdiv-1968.