In re the Claim of Leason

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Leason

50 A.D.2d 640, 375 N.Y.S.2d 54, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12457

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 640 (In re the Claim of Leason) 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 Leason, 50 A.D.2d 640, 375 N.Y.S.2d 54, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 3, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner holding claimant ineligible to receive benefits under the extended benefits program of 1974. Claimant does not dispute the fact that her benefit year expired one day before the beginning of the extended benefit period. Although not mentioned at the hearing, claimant now contends that she was misinformed as to the starting date of the extended benefit period and an exception might have been made in her case if she had applied on February 18, 1974, which was the beginning of the extended benefit period. This contention is without merit (Matter of Barrymore [Levine], 37 AD2d 1043). Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Koreman and Larkin, JJ., concur.

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 April 3, 1975, which affirmed the decision of a referee sustaining an initial determination of the Industrial Commissioner holding claimant ineligible to receive benefits under the extended benefits program of 1974. Claimant does not dispute the fact that her benefit year expired one day before the beginning of the extended benefit period. Although not mentioned at the hearing, claimant now contends that she was misinformed as to the starting date of the extended benefit period and an exception might have been made in her case if she had applied on February 18, 1974, which was the beginning of the extended benefit period. This contention is without merit (Matter of Barrymore [Levine], 37 AD2d 1043). Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Koreman and Larkin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 640, 375 N.Y.S.2d 54, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-leason-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack