From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Monroe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 19, 2009
59 A.D.3d 836 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 505332.

February 19, 2009.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 11, 2007, which denied claimant's application to reopen a prior decision.

Deoines Monroe, New York City, appellant pro se.

Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General, New York City (Steven Koton of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Lahtinen, Stein and McCarthy, JJ.


By decision filed March 27, 2006, an Administrative Law Judge (hereinafter ALJ) ruled that claimant, a security officer, was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he lost his employment through misconduct. Claimant purportedly appealed the ALJ's decision to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board and, more than one year later, inquired and was advised that the Board had no record of his appeal. Thereafter, in July 2007, claimant sought to reopen the ALJ's March 2006 decision. The ALJ denied claimant's application, finding that claimant failed to demonstrate good cause for the approximately 16-month delay that had ensued. The Board affirmed the ALJ's decision, prompting this appeal.

We affirm. The decision to grant an application to reopen is a matter committed to the sound discretion of the Board and, absent an abuse of that discretion, such decision will not be disturbed ( see Matter of Spencer [Commissioner of Labor], 49 AD3d 1047, 1047-1048; Matter of Maymi [Commissioner of Labor], 42 AD3d 845, 846). Claimant's proffered excuse for failing to attend the initial hearing is that he inadvertently took the wrong train to the hearing location. Under such circumstances, we cannot say that the Board abused its discretion in denying claimant's application ( cf. Matter of Chanthyasack [Commissioner of Labor], 37 AD3d 963, 964).

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In re Monroe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 19, 2009
59 A.D.3d 836 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

In re Monroe

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of DEOINES MONROE, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department

Date published: Feb 19, 2009

Citations

59 A.D.3d 836 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 1271
874 N.Y.S.2d 277