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 Marie B. KNOX, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 16, 2000, which, inter alia, reduced claimant's weekly unemployment insurance benefit rate to zero.
Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reducing claimant's unemployment insurance benefit rate to zero and charging her with a recoverable overpayment of benefits.1 The record establishes that after being notified that her job was discontinued, claimant elected to receive a lump-sum payment from her employer-funded pension which she rolled over into an individual retirement account in lieu of receiving a monthly annuity. Pursuant to Labor Law § 600(7), unemployment insurance benefits are to be reduced where an employee receives employer-funded retirement benefits notwithstanding the fact that the benefits are distributed in a lump-sum payment which is then reinvested in an individual retirement account (see, Matter of Kaplan [Sweeney], 236 A.D.2d 738, 739, 658 N.Y.S.2d 459; Matter of Rolland [Eastman Kodak Co.-Sweeney], 232 A.D.2d 710, 648 N.Y.S.2d 184). Furthermore, inasmuch as the determination of overpayment was made within six months from the conditional receipt of benefits, claimant was properly assessed a recoverable overpayment of benefits (see, Labor Law § 597[3] ).
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
FOOTNOTES
1. By initial determination dated April 18, 2000, the Commissioner of Labor initially reduced claimant's weekly benefit rate to $1. By revised determination dated May 5, 2000, claimant's weekly benefit rate was reduced to zero.
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: September 13, 2001
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)