In re the Claim of Shindelman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Shindelman

269 A.D.2d 727, 704 N.Y.S.2d 895, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2078

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

DecidedFebruary 24, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 269 A.D.2d 727 (In re the Claim of Shindelman) 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 Shindelman, 269 A.D.2d 727, 704 N.Y.S.2d 895, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2078 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 26, 1999, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

On its own motion, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reconsidered claimant’s case for the limited purpose of determining if there had been compliance with the procedural requirements set forth in the consent judgment in Municipal Labor Comm. v Sitkin (79 Civ 5899, 1983 WL 44294). The Board concluded that no procedural violations had occurred and, accordingly, it adhered to its prior decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. On this appeal, claimant fails to set forth any procedural errors. We, therefore, find that the Board properly concluded that there were no procedural violations and, accordingly, its decision must be upheld.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Graffeo and Mugglin, 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 February 26, 1999, which ruled that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause.

On its own motion, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reconsidered claimant’s case for the limited purpose of determining if there had been compliance with the procedural requirements set forth in the consent judgment in Municipal Labor Comm. v Sitkin (79 Civ 5899, 1983 WL 44294). The Board concluded that no procedural violations had occurred and, accordingly, it adhered to its prior decision disqualifying claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she voluntarily left her employment without good cause. On this appeal, claimant fails to set forth any procedural errors. We, therefore, find that the Board properly concluded that there were no procedural violations and, accordingly, its decision must be upheld.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, Crew III, Graffeo and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 727, 704 N.Y.S.2d 895, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2078, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-shindelman-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack