In re the Claim of Kriegsman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Kriegsman

251 A.D.2d 945, 674 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7768

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

DecidedJune 25, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 945 (In re the Claim of Kriegsman) 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 Kriegsman, 251 A.D.2d 945, 674 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 18, 1997, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive additional unemployment insurance benefits under Labor Law § 599.

[946]*946Claimant, a New Jersey resident, was employed in this State until mid-May 1995, after which he collected unemployment insurance benefits. In October 1995, claimant was accepted in a vocational training program sponsored by the New Jersey Division of Employment and Training, which was scheduled to commence in June 1996. Claimant did not, however, give notice of his intended matriculation nor did he apply for an extension of his regular unemployment insurance benefits until June 1996, seven months after his original benefits had been exhausted. Claimant’s application was denied and this appeal ensued.

We affirm. Labor Law § 599 (1) provides that a claimant seeking extended benefits must attend a “program of training which the commissioner has approved” (see, Matter of Raskin [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 691). In the matter under review, the out-of-State course that claimant planned to attend was never approved by the Commissioner; hence, claimant was correctly found to be ineligible for extended benefits. In view of our disposition, we need not address claimant’s remaining contentions.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. 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

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 18, 1997, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive additional unemployment insurance benefits under Labor Law § 599.

[946]*946Claimant, a New Jersey resident, was employed in this State until mid-May 1995, after which he collected unemployment insurance benefits. In October 1995, claimant was accepted in a vocational training program sponsored by the New Jersey Division of Employment and Training, which was scheduled to commence in June 1996. Claimant did not, however, give notice of his intended matriculation nor did he apply for an extension of his regular unemployment insurance benefits until June 1996, seven months after his original benefits had been exhausted. Claimant’s application was denied and this appeal ensued.

We affirm. Labor Law § 599 (1) provides that a claimant seeking extended benefits must attend a “program of training which the commissioner has approved” (see, Matter of Raskin [Sweeney], 239 AD2d 691). In the matter under review, the out-of-State course that claimant planned to attend was never approved by the Commissioner; hence, claimant was correctly found to be ineligible for extended benefits. In view of our disposition, we need not address claimant’s remaining contentions.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 945, 674 N.Y.S.2d 855, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-kriegsman-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack