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 Estelle R. CALE, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 7, 2006, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she was not available for employment.
Claimant, a Canadian national, worked as a social worker at New York University Medical Center (hereinafter NYUMC) under a Trade NAFTA visa (hereinafter TN visa). She held two positions, one in the inpatient portion of the medical center and the other in the emergency room. After her inpatient position was eliminated, she applied for partial unemployment insurance benefits. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that she was ineligible to receive them because she was not available for employment. Claimant appeals.
We affirm. In order to be considered available for work and, therefore, eligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits, a non-United States citizen must have valid authorization from the Immigration and Naturalization Service to work in the United States (see Matter of Enrique [Commissioner of Labor], 13 A.D.3d 967, 968, 786 N.Y.S.2d 661 [2004]; Matter of Okumakpeyi [Commissioner of Labor], 295 A.D.2d 828, 829, 744 N.Y.S.2d 545 [2002] ). Like the claimant in Matter of Graif (Commissioner of Labor), 250 A.D.2d 1012, 673 N.Y.S.2d 261 [1998], claimant here was working under a TN visa which restricted the work she was authorized to perform to a particular employer, namely, NYUMC. When her employment with NYUMC was reduced, she was not authorized to seek employment with a different employer until she obtained another visa. In view of this, substantial evidence supports the Board's finding that claimant was not available for employment such as to be eligible for benefits.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
CARDONA, P.J., CREW III, PETERS, SPAIN and CARPINELLO, JJ., concur.
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: December 13, 2007
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)