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: SPECTACULAR LIMO LINK, INC., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed November 29, 2004, which ruled that Spectacular Limo Link, Inc. was liable for unemployment insurance contributions on remuneration paid to certain drivers.
Spectacular Limo Link, Inc. operates a limousine transportation service and hires drivers by advertising and by word-of-mouth referrals. The drivers are assigned jobs, told where and when to go and are required to display Spectacular's sign when picking up passengers. Spectacular sets the rates that passengers are charged and handles all the billing, collecting fares and customer complaints. Upon completion of their assignments, the drivers submit to Spectacular their receipts and vouchers, along with their daily logbook, and are paid 65% of the fares they collect each week. The drivers are not allowed to use substitute drivers without Spectacular's prior approval.
Under the circumstances presented here, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's decision finding the limousine drivers to be employees and assessing Spectacular additional contributions is supported by substantial evidence and must be sustained (see Matter of De Paiva [Olympic Limousine-Commissioner of Labor], 270 A.D.2d 534, 534-535, 703 N.Y.S.2d 589 [2000]; Matter of Jarzabek [NYC Two Way-Sweeney], 235 A.D.2d 878, 653 N.Y.S.2d 165 [1997]; Matter of Freidenberg [Limousine Resources Mtg. Corp.-Sweeney], 235 A.D.2d 866, 652 N.Y.S.2d 831 [1997] ). The fact that the record also contains evidence which would support a contrary conclusion does not mandate reversal under these circumstances (see Matter of De Paiva [Olympic Limousine-Commissioner of Labor], supra at 535, 703 N.Y.S.2d 589).
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
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 15, 2005
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)