Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: the Claim of Stephen C. SIU, Appellant. John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 11, 1997, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he did not have sufficient weeks of covered employment to file a valid original claim.
Claimant was enrolled in a four-year residency program at New York Hospital, a teaching hospital certified to train medical school graduates in medical specialties. Claimant was trained in the specialty of pathology during his residency and received a certificate identifying him as a specialist in that field upon his completion of the program. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board subsequently ruled that Labor Law § 511(15) rendered claimant ineligible for the unemployment insurance benefits he received following the completion of his residency. We affirm. Labor Law § 511(15) provides that services rendered to an educational institution by a person who is enrolled in and regularly attends said institution do not constitute “employment” within the meaning of the Labor Law. Whether this exclusion applies depends on whether the claimant performed the work in question for the primary purpose of earning a living or of furthering his or her education (see, Matter of Mitromaras [Roberts], 122 A.D.2d 368, 369, 504 N.Y.S.2d 331). Substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant worked as a resident in a teaching hospital for the specific purpose of enhancing his medical education by obtaining the training and experience that would enable him to become a pathologist. Hence, the Board's ruling that claimant was ineligible for benefits under Labor Law § 511(15), together with its assessment of a recoverable overpayment, will not be disturbed.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: November 13, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)