In re the Clam of Bicjan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Clam of Bicjan

219 A.D.2d 751, 631 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9156

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

DecidedSeptember 7, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 219 A.D.2d 751 (In re the Clam of Bicjan) 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 Clam of Bicjan, 219 A.D.2d 751, 631 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9156 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed March 23, 1994, which ruled, inter alia, that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she had a reasonable assurance of continued employment.

Claimant, a substitute teacher, was notified by her employer that her name appeared on the preferred list for the 1992-1993 academic year and that it intended to call her to teach during this period. In view of this, the Board found that she received a reasonable assurance of continued employment and, therefore, found her ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits during the summer of 1992. Upon review of the record, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. This case is distinguishable from Matter of Bicjan (New York City Bd. of Educ. — Hudacs) (201 AD2d 813), which involved claimant’s claim for benefits during a different time period. We have examined claimant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Mikoll, Mercure, 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 March 23, 1994, which ruled, inter alia, that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she had a reasonable assurance of continued employment.

Claimant, a substitute teacher, was notified by her employer that her name appeared on the preferred list for the 1992-1993 academic year and that it intended to call her to teach during this period. In view of this, the Board found that she received a reasonable assurance of continued employment and, therefore, found her ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits during the summer of 1992. Upon review of the record, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. This case is distinguishable from Matter of Bicjan (New York City Bd. of Educ. — Hudacs) (201 AD2d 813), which involved claimant’s claim for benefits during a different time period. We have examined claimant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 A.D.2d 751, 631 N.Y.S.2d 86, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-clam-of-bicjan-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack