In re the Claim of Tenors

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Tenors

244 A.D.2d 749, 664 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11735

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

DecidedNovember 20, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 244 A.D.2d 749 (In re the Claim of Tenors) 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 Tenors, 244 A.D.2d 749, 664 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11735 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 14, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.

While collecting unemployment insurance benefits, claimant failed to report his involvement in his father’s taxi business to the local unemployment insurance office. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently found him ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he was not totally unemployed. In addition, the Board charged him with a recoverable overpayment of benefits and assessed a forfeiture penalty of 292 benefit days upon finding that he had made willful false statements to obtain benefits.

[750]*750We reject claimant’s contention that there is no evidence to support the Board’s finding that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits. The record reveals that claimant was an authorized signatory on the business checking account and routinely wrote checks on its behalf. Although claimant maintains that he was not involved in the business while he was unemployed and wrote checks only to help his ailing father, the record discloses that claimant signed yearly Federal income tax returns for the corporation, was a 50% shareholder and was listed as its president on another official document. This, coupled with claimant’s admitted failure to read the information booklet distributed by the local office, constitutes substantial evidence supporting the Board’s conclusion that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits (see, Matter of Hilburger [Mudacs], 183 AD2d 1016). Consequently, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters 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 August 14, 1996, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.

While collecting unemployment insurance benefits, claimant failed to report his involvement in his father’s taxi business to the local unemployment insurance office. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently found him ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he was not totally unemployed. In addition, the Board charged him with a recoverable overpayment of benefits and assessed a forfeiture penalty of 292 benefit days upon finding that he had made willful false statements to obtain benefits.

[750]*750We reject claimant’s contention that there is no evidence to support the Board’s finding that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits. The record reveals that claimant was an authorized signatory on the business checking account and routinely wrote checks on its behalf. Although claimant maintains that he was not involved in the business while he was unemployed and wrote checks only to help his ailing father, the record discloses that claimant signed yearly Federal income tax returns for the corporation, was a 50% shareholder and was listed as its president on another official document. This, coupled with claimant’s admitted failure to read the information booklet distributed by the local office, constitutes substantial evidence supporting the Board’s conclusion that claimant made willful false statements to obtain benefits (see, Matter of Hilburger [Mudacs], 183 AD2d 1016). Consequently, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, White, Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 A.D.2d 749, 664 N.Y.S.2d 667, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11735, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-tenors-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack