In re the Claim of Ramirez

256 A.D.2d 705, 681 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13033
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 3, 1998·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

—Appeals from two decisions of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed July 11, 1997, which, inter alia, ruled that Gottlieb Jewelry, Inc. was liable for unemployment insurance contributions based upon remuneration paid to claimant and those similarly situated.

Claimant is a diamond setter who performed services for [706] Gottlieb Jewelry, Inc. Gottlieb challenges separate decisions by the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant and others similarly situated are employees rather than independent contractors and assessing Gottlieb for additional unemployment insurance contributions. We affirm. Claimant testified that he contacted Gottlieb for work in response to a newspaper advertisement, was required to work hours set by Gottlieb and had to phone in when he could not come in to work. Gottlieb unilaterally set the rates to be paid and claimant was required to complete a form provided by Gottlieb in order to receive compensation, which was paid out on a regular basis. According to claimant, Gottlieb provided some of the equipment and materials needed to perform the work and claimant was required to submit his work for approval. The Board was entitled to credit the proof demonstrating that Gottlieb exercises overall control with regard to important aspects of the services rendered (see, Matter of Braunstein [Dinaire Corp. — Commissioner of Labor], 250 AD2d 899, 900). Thus, we find that there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s finding of an employer-employee relationship despite the presence in the record of evidence to support a contrary conclusion (see, Matter of Yank [National Evaluation Sys.—Sweeney], 247 AD2d 806, lv denied 92 NY2d 804).

Crew III, J. P., White, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decisions are affirmed, without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re the Claim of Ramirez, 256 A.D.2d 705, 681 N.Y.S.2d 137, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13033 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

256 A.D.2d 705 (In re the Claim of Ramirez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Matter of DeVaul (Commr. of Labor)
138 A.D.3d 1371 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
In re the Claim of Guo Lee Yu
301 A.D.2d 708 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
In re the Claim of Lee
260 A.D.2d 881 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
In re the Claim of Tyner
257 A.D.2d 922 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)