In re the Claim of Yancey

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Yancey

205 A.D.2d 821, 615 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5892

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

DecidedJune 2, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 821 (In re the Claim of Yancey) 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 Yancey, 205 A.D.2d 821, 615 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5892 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 3, 1992, which found that claimant and others similarly situated were employees of Blue Star Mortgage Group, Inc.

[822]*822We find that the record contains substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination that claimant, a mortgage salesperson, and others similarly situated are employees of Blue Star Mortgage Group, Inc., a licensed mortgage broker. Whether an employer-employee relationship exists is a question of fact for the Board to determine. Here, the record establishes that the Blue Star exercised sufficient direction or control over claimant’s activities to create an employment relationship. Moreover, it is well settled that the existence of an independent contractor agreement is not necessarily dis-positive in these cases.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, 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 December 3, 1992, which found that claimant and others similarly situated were employees of Blue Star Mortgage Group, Inc.

[822]*822We find that the record contains substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination that claimant, a mortgage salesperson, and others similarly situated are employees of Blue Star Mortgage Group, Inc., a licensed mortgage broker. Whether an employer-employee relationship exists is a question of fact for the Board to determine. Here, the record establishes that the Blue Star exercised sufficient direction or control over claimant’s activities to create an employment relationship. Moreover, it is well settled that the existence of an independent contractor agreement is not necessarily dis-positive in these cases.

Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Crew III, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 821, 615 N.Y.S.2d 302, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5892, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-yancey-nyappdiv-1994.