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 Jose A. UMPIERRE, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 2, 2008, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.
Whether a claimant is totally unemployed presents a factual issue for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to resolve, and its determination in this regard, if supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole, will not be disturbed (see Matter of Bernard [Commissioner of Labor], 53 A.D.3d 1006, 863 N.Y.S.2d 279 [2008]; Matter of Chirico [Commissioner of Labor], 49 A.D.3d 1104, 1105, 853 N.Y.S.2d 736 [2008]; see generally Matter of Thomas [Commissioner of Labor], 58 A.D.3d 1099, 871 N.Y.S.2d 790 [2009] ). Claimant, who performed administrative clerical work for a temporary employment agency, claims that there was no “solid documentation presented to support the Board's determination.” However, the employer submitted copies of claimant's pay stubs showing his wages for the time period in question, as well as a completed “audit of unemployment insurance benefit pay” form that specified the dates that claimant worked. This documentary evidence submitted by the employer establishes that claimant indeed worked for the employer on dates that he claimed to be totally unemployed (see Matter of De Robbio [Commissioner of Labor], 8 A.D.3d 947, 947-948, 779 N.Y.S.2d 277 [2004] ). While claimant testified that he could not recall working during this period, his testimony falls short of denying that he worked. Under such circumstances, the Board's finding that claimant was not totally unemployed, as well as its imposition of a recoverable overpayment and forfeiture of future benefits, is supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Perez [Commissioner of Labor], 19 A.D.3d 793, 794, 796 N.Y.S.2d 454 [2005]; see also Matter of Sexton [Commissioner of Labor], 51 A.D.3d 1312, 1312-1313, 858 N.Y.S.2d 463 [2008] ).
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 12, 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)