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 JOSE A. UMPIERRE, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF LABOR, Respondent.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Calendar Date: December 16, 2010
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 10, 2009, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive emergency unemployment compensation benefits.
Claimant successfully sought unemployment insurance benefits for a benefit year beginning in February 2008, which were paid for the full duration permitted (see Labor Law §§ 521, 590[4] ). Thereafter, he received emergency unemployment compensation (hereinafter EUC) benefits, which were paid to individuals who had “exhausted all rights to regular compensation under the [s]tate law or under [f]ederal law with respect to a benefit year” (Pub L No 110-252, tit IV, § 4001[b][1], 122 U.S. Stat 2323). At the end of that benefit year, claimant reapplied-effective February 23, 2009-for unemployment insurance benefits and was found to have a valid original claim that entitled him to renewed regular benefits, albeit at a rate substantially lower than that paid in the previous year (see Labor Law § 527). The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ultimately determined that claimant was not entitled to ongoing EUC benefits because of his renewed eligibility for regular benefits, and claimant appeals.
We affirm. As a matter of federal law, federally funded EUC benefits are only available when a claimant's right to receive regular benefits under state law is exhausted, such as where he or she “has received all regular compensation available to such individual based on employment or wages during such individual's base period” or “by reason of the expiration of the benefit year with respect to which such rights existed” (Pub L No 110-252, tit IV, § 4001 [c], 122 U.S. Stat 2323). While claimant here exhausted his right to regular benefits in the prior benefit year, he had renewed eligibility for benefits in the next, and the Board properly determined that he was not entitled to ongoing EUC benefits as a result (see e.g. Matter of Plapinger [Ross], 53 A.D.2d 931 [1976]; Matter of Swyer [Levine], 52 A.D.2d 707, 708 [1976] ).
Spain, J.P., Lahtinen, Kavanagh, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur.
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
ENTER:
Robert D. Mayberger
Clerk of the Court
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.
Docket No: 510235
Decided: January 27, 2011
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)