From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Hardamon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 7, 2005
17 A.D.3d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

96710.

April 7, 2005.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 13, 2004, which, inter alia, denied claimant's application to reopen and reconsider a prior decision.

Latissya A. Hardamon, Jamaica, appellant pro se.

McGuire Woods, New York City (Richard Sutton of counsel), for Menorah Home and Hospital for the Aging, respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Peters, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur.


Claimant worked as a dietary aide for a skilled nursing facility. She was terminated on January 27, 2003 for falsifying a doctor's note. Claimant was initially found eligible and received unemployment insurance benefits. Upon her employer's objection, however, a hearing was held, which claimant did not attend. After concluding that claimant had lost her employment through misconduct, the Administrative Law Judge overruled the initial determination and disqualified claimant from receiving unemployment insurance benefits. Claimant's subsequent application to reopen this decision was denied. She then appealed to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which, among other things, ruled that her application to reopen the Administrative Law Judge's initial decision was properly denied. Claimant now appeals.

"Whether to grant an application to reopen a decision is within the discretion of the Board and, absent a showing that the Board abused its discretion, its decision will not be disturbed" ( Matter of Kendricks [Commissioner of Labor], 1 AD3d 682, 682-683 [citation omitted]; see Matter of Martinez [Commissioner of Labor], 288 AD2d 684, 684-685). Here, claimant testified that she did not attend the hearing because she was receiving benefits and did not think that it was necessary. She offered no other excuse for her failure to appear. Under these circumstances, we find that the Board did not abuse its discretion in denying claimant's application ( see e.g. Matter of Mian [Commissioner of Labor], 294 AD2d 699).

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Hardamon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 7, 2005
17 A.D.3d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

In the Matter of Hardamon

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of LATISSYA A. HARDAMON, Appellant. MENORAH…

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

Date published: Apr 7, 2005

Citations

17 A.D.3d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
792 N.Y.S.2d 707

Citing Cases

In re Maymi

In her application, claimant did not set forth her reasons for not attending the hearings other than stating…

In re Arleigh

When this matter was last before us, this Court affirmed a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal…