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 Edwin MOREIRA Jr., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 19, 1997, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.
Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant was not totally unemployed during the periods that he was receiving benefits and charging him with a recoverable overpayment. The record indicates that claimant filed a business certificate for a tree trimming and tree removal business in 1989. Although claimant testified that he never pursued the business, the record establishes that he failed to file a certificate of discontinuance. Moreover, claimant filed a schedule C (business income and loss) with his tax returns during the years that he had received benefits, reporting small net profits and obtaining tax advantages for operating his business. Although claimant and his accountant testified that the schedule C forms were improperly filed and that amended tax returns for the years in question had been prepared, claimant failed to produce the amended tax returns although specifically asked to do so (see, e.g., Matter of Ikoli [Commissioner of Labor], 249 A.D.2d 673, 671 N.Y.S.2d 206; Matter of Polax [New York City Dept. of Correction-Sweeney], 220 A.D.2d 919, 632 N.Y.S.2d 318). While claimant submits the documents on appeal, we decline to consider evidence not presented at the hearings or to the Board. Based upon our review of the record, we find no reason to disturb the Board's decision (see, Matter of Murak [Sweeney], 244 A.D.2d 751, 664 N.Y.S.2d 661; Matter of Monro [Sweeney], 235 A.D.2d 885, 653 N.Y.S.2d 46).
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: June 25, 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)