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 Calvin L. THOMAS, Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 15, 2007, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.
Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board's determination that claimant, the sole principal of a subchapter S corporation that he had formed to further his employment as a computer programmer, was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits on the basis that he was not totally unemployed (see Matter of DeAngelo [Commissioner of Labor ], 54 A.D.3d 468, 468, 863 N.Y.S.2d 292 [2008] ). The law is settled that “a principal of a corporation will not be considered totally unemployed even if the activities he or she performs on its behalf are minimal, so long as he or she stands to benefit financially from its continued operation” (Matter of Spielman [Commissioner of Labor ], 42 A.D.3d 621, 622, 839 N.Y.S.2d 311 [2007] ). Here, claimant had an active corporate checking account, maintained a Web site for the corporation where he periodically checked for e-mails regarding work opportunities and filed corporate tax returns including business expense deductions. In view of the foregoing, claimant stood to gain financially from his activities on behalf of his corporation (see Matter of Marcus [Commissioner of Labor], 47 A.D.3d 1180, 1180-1181, 850 N.Y.S.2d 693 [2008] ).
To the extent not specifically addressed herein, claimant's remaining contentions have been considered and found to be without merit.
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: January 29, 2009
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)