In re the Claim of Zaimoff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim of Zaimoff

27 A.D.2d 782, 277 N.Y.S.2d 218, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4861

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

DecidedFebruary 15, 1967

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 27 A.D.2d 782 (In re the Claim of Zaimoff) 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 Zaimoff, 27 A.D.2d 782, 277 N.Y.S.2d 218, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4861 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from benefits on the ground that she did not comply with provisions of the Labor Law and Regulations of the Industrial Commissioner for the filing of a claim, registration and reporting (Labor Law, § 590, subds. 1, 8; § 596; 12 NYCRR 473.1). Claimant, a bookeeper, was unemployed from January 3, 1966 to January 13, 1966, during the period of the transit strike in New York City. She reported to her regular employment when the stoppage terminated on January 14, 1966. Believing that her employer would pay her for the time she lost, she did not file a claim until February 4, 1966 at which time she was advised her employer had no such intention. Failure to comply with the statute and regulations may be excused upon satisfying the Commissioner that there was good cause for such noncompliance. Here claimant’s explanation of her failure to file or even to appear or inquire at the local unemployment. insurance office two or three blocks from her home created a factual issue for the board’s evaluation and we believe that there is substantial evidence to sustain its determination. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Aulisi, J.

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

Aulisi, J.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board disqualifying claimant from benefits on the ground that she did not comply with provisions of the Labor Law and Regulations of the Industrial Commissioner for the filing of a claim, registration and reporting (Labor Law, § 590, subds. 1, 8; § 596; 12 NYCRR 473.1). Claimant, a bookeeper, was unemployed from January 3, 1966 to January 13, 1966, during the period of the transit strike in New York City. She reported to her regular employment when the stoppage terminated on January 14, 1966. Believing that her employer would pay her for the time she lost, she did not file a claim until February 4, 1966 at which time she was advised her employer had no such intention. Failure to comply with the statute and regulations may be excused upon satisfying the Commissioner that there was good cause for such noncompliance. Here claimant’s explanation of her failure to file or even to appear or inquire at the local unemployment. insurance office two or three blocks from her home created a factual issue for the board’s evaluation and we believe that there is substantial evidence to sustain its determination. Decision affirmed, without costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Aulisi and Staley, Jr., JJ., concur in a memorandum decision by Aulisi, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

27 A.D.2d 782, 277 N.Y.S.2d 218, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4861, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-of-zaimoff-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack