In re the Claim of Stabile

250 A.D.2d 906, 672 N.Y.S.2d 517, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5386
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 7, 1998·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 12, 1997, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she failed to comply with registration requirements.

Claimant was laid off from her job at a legal placement agency, effective January 8, 1997, and she thereafter received eight weeks of severance pay. Claimant failed to apply for unemployment insurance benefits, however, until after her severance pay ended based upon information she was allegedly given after telephoning the local office. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive benefits during the period she collected severance pay because of her failure to register as required by the Labor Law. We affirm. Whether claimant demonstrated “good cause” for her failure to register for benefits until March 3, 1997 is a factual question for the Board (see, Matter of Terranova [Hudacs], 211 AD2d 847, 848). Given the testimony that information clerks do not furnish the type of advice that claimant stated that she received, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s finding that claimant’s excuse was not credible (see, id.). Thus, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision (Matter of Tyk [Hudacs], 205 AD2d 820).

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Carpinello, 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

In re the Claim of Stabile, 250 A.D.2d 906, 672 N.Y.S.2d 517, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5386 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

250 A.D.2d 906 (In re the Claim of Stabile) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re the Claim of Moretti
17 A.D.3d 761 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
In re the Claim of Brady
5 A.D.3d 838 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
In re the Claim of Foertsch
272 A.D.2d 739 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
In re the Claim of Guerin
257 A.D.2d 797 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)