In re the Claim of Obando

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Obando

212 A.D.2d 928, 623 N.Y.S.2d 177, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1590

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

DecidedFebruary 16, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 212 A.D.2d 928 (In re the Claim of Obando) 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 Obando, 212 A.D.2d 928, 623 N.Y.S.2d 177, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1590 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 21, 1993, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

There is substantial evidence in the record to support the Board’s determination that claimant did not request a hearing until after the 30-day statutory time period had expired. Contrary to claimant’s contention, there is an evidentiary basis for the Board’s finding that claimant’s physical disability did not preclude him from filing a timely request. We have considered claimant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. 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 21, 1993, which ruled that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

There is substantial evidence in the record to support the Board’s determination that claimant did not request a hearing until after the 30-day statutory time period had expired. Contrary to claimant’s contention, there is an evidentiary basis for the Board’s finding that claimant’s physical disability did not preclude him from filing a timely request. We have considered claimant’s other arguments and find them to be without merit.

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

212 A.D.2d 928, 623 N.Y.S.2d 177, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1590, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-obando-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack