In re the Claim Stamos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Claim Stamos

33 A.D.2d 589, 304 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3118

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

DecidedOctober 20, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 33 A.D.2d 589 (In re the Claim Stamos) 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 Stamos, 33 A.D.2d 589, 304 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3118 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Cooke, J.

Appeal from a decision of the .Unemployment Insurance. Appeal Board, filed July 5, 1968, disqualifying claimant from unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he was not available for employment. The record includes substantial evidence to support the board’s finding that claimant’s limited and restricted efforts have imposed such an obstacle to his employability as to render him unavailable for employment, the question of whether a claimant’s efforts to secure employment are sufficiently diligent to satisfy the statutory requirement of availability being a question of fact to be determined by the board and to be sustained if rendered upon substantial evidence (Matter of Forsyth [Catherwood], 31 A D 2d 707; Matter of Zammiello [Catherwood], 30 A D 2d 597; Matter of Knobloah [Catherwood], 28 A D 2d 765, 766). Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Green-bl'ott and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum by Cooke, J.

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

Cooke, J.

Appeal from a decision of the .Unemployment Insurance. Appeal Board, filed July 5, 1968, disqualifying claimant from unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he was not available for employment. The record includes substantial evidence to support the board’s finding that claimant’s limited and restricted efforts have imposed such an obstacle to his employability as to render him unavailable for employment, the question of whether a claimant’s efforts to secure employment are sufficiently diligent to satisfy the statutory requirement of availability being a question of fact to be determined by the board and to be sustained if rendered upon substantial evidence (Matter of Forsyth [Catherwood], 31 A D 2d 707; Matter of Zammiello [Catherwood], 30 A D 2d 597; Matter of Knobloah [Catherwood], 28 A D 2d 765, 766). Decision affirmed, without costs. Herlihy, P. J., Reynolds, Staley, Jr., Green-bl'ott and Cooke, JJ., concur in memorandum by Cooke, J.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.2d 589, 304 N.Y.S.2d 367, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-claim-stamos-nyappdiv-1969.