In re the Claim of Woods

54 A.D.2d 515, 386 N.Y.S.2d 249, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13772
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 5, 1976·Published·Cited by 14 cases

Opinion

Appeals from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 6, 1975, which reversed the decision of a referee and sustained initial determinations of the Industrial Commissioner holding both claimants ineligible to receive benefits effective various dates because they were not totally unemployed; charging claimant Woods with an overpayment of $750.25 in benefits ruled to be recoverable, and holding that she willfully made false statements to obtain benefits by reason of which a forfeiture of 76 effective days was imposed as a penalty in reduction of her future benefit rights; charging claimant Cadden with an overpayment of $713.75 in benefits ruled to be recoverable and holding that she willfully made false statements to obtain benefits by reason of which a forfeiture of 72 effective days was imposed as a penalty in reduction of her future benefit rights. The claimants were sewing machine operators who worked for the employer for many years. They were paid a salary and also on piecework. During the periods in issue they applied for insurance benefits and certified to total unemployment. The employer’s records show that during the periods in issue, wages were paid to the husbands of the claimants. The employer testified that the claimants took work home while laid off and receiving benefits, and when they returned the finished work they told the employer that their husbands had done the sewing. This testimony contradicts the allegations by claimants that they were being paid for prior work. Although the earnings were attributed to claimants’ husbands, admittedly the husbands could not sew and did none of the work. Questions of credibility are within the sole province of the board and its determinations thereon are final (Labor Law, § 623; Matter of Roth [Catherwood], 34 AD2d 1081). There is substantial evidence in the record to support the finding that claimants willfully made false statements to obtain benefits and, accordingly, such finding is not to be disturbed (Matter of Juris [Catherwood] 33 AD2d 852). Since claimants were aware that they had worked when they certified to total unemployment, such certifications were willfully and falsely made and benefits paid as a result thereof are recoverable (Labor Law, § 594). Decision affirmed, without costs. Koreman, P. J., Greenblott, Mahoney, Main and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

In re the Claim of Woods, 54 A.D.2d 515, 386 N.Y.S.2d 249, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13772 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

54 A.D.2d 515 (In re the Claim of Woods) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

In re the Claim of Russolello
196 A.D.2d 929 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re the Claim of Goldstein
192 A.D.2d 919 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
In re the Claim of Broomes
186 A.D.2d 972 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re D'Amico
186 A.D.2d 331 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Stanford
186 A.D.2d 333 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Cestaro
184 A.D.2d 986 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Dunleavy
180 A.D.2d 861 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim of Caravan
179 A.D.2d 972 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
In re the Claim Lespier
178 A.D.2d 704 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Head
176 A.D.2d 1126 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Marsh
176 A.D.2d 424 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Koppel
176 A.D.2d 425 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Andrews
176 A.D.2d 429 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1991)
In re the Claim of Murphy
83 A.D.2d 734 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)