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 Raymond D. McCOOL, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 17, 2007, which charged claimant with a recoverable overpayment of unemployment insurance benefits.
Claimant was discharged from his position as a truck driver after a criminal background check conducted by the employer revealed two prior felony convictions which had not been disclosed on his employment application. Although he had initially received unemployment insurance benefits, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ultimately determined that claimant lost his employment through misconduct for falsely indicating on the employment application that he had never been convicted of a crime. Claimant did not appeal this decision.
Over a year later, recovery of a $2,554 overpayment was sought on the ground that claimant made false statements at a previous hearing on the matter (see Labor Law § 597[4] ). Indeed, at that hearing, claimant denied that he personally checked the “no” box on the application question inquiring about past convictions and could not explain how it was so completed. The Board found that this testimony was factually and willfully false. Substantial evidence supports the Board's assessment of claimant's credibility and thus its finding of a willful misrepresentation sufficient to support the imposition of a recoverable overpayment (see Labor Law § 597[3], [4]; Matter of Ricciardi [Commissioner of Labor], 47 A.D.3d 1039, 1039-1040, 849 N.Y.S.2d 349 [2008]; Matter of Falco [Sweeney], 246 A.D.2d 711, 667 N.Y.S.2d 499 [1998], lv. denied 92 N.Y.2d 815, 683 N.Y.S.2d 759, 706 N.E.2d 747 [1998] ).
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
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: March 05, 2009
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)