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 Wanda PITTMAN, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed April 17, 1997, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive additional unemployment insurance benefits pursuant to Labor Law § 599.
After exhausting her regular unemployment insurance benefits, claimant applied for additional benefits in order to attend a data entry and word processing training course for which she had been accepted. Claimant challenges the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which denied her application for additional benefits. We affirm. Inasmuch as claimant failed to notify the local unemployment insurance office of her acceptance into an approved training course or apply in writing for additional benefits prior to the expiration of her regular benefits, we conclude that the Board's decision is supported by substantial evidence (see, Labor Law § 599; 12 NYCRR 482.2[a], [e]; see also, Matter of Ellenport [Sweeney], 242 A.D.2d 821, 661 N.Y.S.2d 873; Matter of Kern [Sweeney], 216 A.D.2d 769, 628 N.Y.S.2d 841). Although claimant maintains that she was mislead by a representative of the local unemployment office regarding her application for additional benefits, the representative's testimony to the contrary created a credibility issue for the Board to resolve (see, Matter of Falco [Sweeney], 226 A.D.2d 878, 640 N.Y.S.2d 655). Claimant's remaining contentions, to the extent that they are preserved for our review, are lacking in merit.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
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: July 09, 1998
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)