In re the Claim of Perone

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Perone

217 A.D.2d 730, 628 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7671

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

DecidedJuly 6, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 217 A.D.2d 730 (In re the Claim of Perone) 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 Perone, 217 A.D.2d 730, 628 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7671 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 8, 1993, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The Board reopened claimant’s case on its own motion for the purpose of determining whether there had been compliance with the procedural safeguards set forth in the consent judgment in Municipal Labor Comm, v Sitkin (79 Civ 5899, 1983 WL 44294). After reviewing the record, the Board concluded that there had been no procedural violations and, consequently, it adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he was terminated for misconduct. We have considered the procedural arguments raised by claimant on appeal and find them to be without merit. Moreover, inasmuch as claimant failed to perfect his appeal from the Board’s prior decision and the Board did not address the merits of claimant’s case upon reconsideration, we decline to address the merits here.

[731]*731Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, 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 December 8, 1993, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because his employment was terminated due to misconduct.

The Board reopened claimant’s case on its own motion for the purpose of determining whether there had been compliance with the procedural safeguards set forth in the consent judgment in Municipal Labor Comm, v Sitkin (79 Civ 5899, 1983 WL 44294). After reviewing the record, the Board concluded that there had been no procedural violations and, consequently, it adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving benefits because he was terminated for misconduct. We have considered the procedural arguments raised by claimant on appeal and find them to be without merit. Moreover, inasmuch as claimant failed to perfect his appeal from the Board’s prior decision and the Board did not address the merits of claimant’s case upon reconsideration, we decline to address the merits here.

[731]*731Mercure, J. P., Crew III, Casey, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

217 A.D.2d 730, 628 N.Y.S.2d 1019, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7671, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-perone-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack