In re the Claim of Levin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Levin

244 A.D.2d 642, 665 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11131

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 642 (In re the Claim of Levin) 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 Levin, 244 A.D.2d 642, 665 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11131 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 13, 1996, which, inter alia, reduced claimant’s weekly unemployment insurance benefit rate to zero.

The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that Labor Law § 600 (7) required a reduction in claimant’s benefit rate reflecting his receipt of payments from an employer-funded pension fund. Claimant also was charged with a recoverable overpayment. We affirm. Substantial evidence supports the finding that claimant’s pension fund was 100% funded by the employer, thereby triggering the statutory reduction in benefit payments (see, Matter of Chriscaden [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 803).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Peters and Spain, 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 September 13, 1996, which, inter alia, reduced claimant’s weekly unemployment insurance benefit rate to zero.

The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that Labor Law § 600 (7) required a reduction in claimant’s benefit rate reflecting his receipt of payments from an employer-funded pension fund. Claimant also was charged with a recoverable overpayment. We affirm. Substantial evidence supports the finding that claimant’s pension fund was 100% funded by the employer, thereby triggering the statutory reduction in benefit payments (see, Matter of Chriscaden [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 803).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 642, 665 N.Y.S.2d 356, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-levin-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack