In re the Claim of Lord

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Lord

241 A.D.2d 685, 663 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7345

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

DecidedJuly 10, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 241 A.D.2d 685 (In re the Claim of Lord) 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 Lord, 241 A.D.2d 685, 663 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7345 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 4, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant’s benefit rate should be reduced.

The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that Labor Law § 600 (7) (b) required a reduction in claimant’s benefit rate reflecting his receipt of payments from an employer-funded pension fund. Claimant was also 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; Matter of Skinder [Sweeney], 226 AD2d 796).

[686]*686Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, 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 October 4, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant’s benefit rate should be reduced.

The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that Labor Law § 600 (7) (b) required a reduction in claimant’s benefit rate reflecting his receipt of payments from an employer-funded pension fund. Claimant was also 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; Matter of Skinder [Sweeney], 226 AD2d 796).

[686]*686Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 A.D.2d 685, 663 N.Y.S.2d 1013, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7345, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-lord-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack