From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Nicotra

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 15, 2004
6 A.D.3d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

94676.

Decided and Entered: April 15, 2004.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed January 10, 2003, which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling, inter alia, that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she was not totally unemployed.

Margaret E. Nicotra, Shirley, appellant pro se.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney General, New York City (Steven Segall of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board which, upon reconsideration, adhered to its prior decision ruling that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she was not totally unemployed. The record establishes that although claimant was not an active participant in her husband's home construction business, she was listed as vice-president and treasurer, 50% corporate shareholder and was a signatory on the corporation's bank account. In addition, during her claimed period of unemployment "shareholder distribution" checks in the sum of $200 each were issued to her every week from the corporation. These checks were endorsed by claimant's husband using claimant's name and deposited in their joint account. Under these circumstances, we find no reason to disturb the Board's decision that the alleged weekly shareholder dividends actually constituted remuneration for claimant's status as a corporate officer ( see Matter of Sierpinski [Commissioner of Labor], 308 A.D.2d 668, 669). Furthermore, given claimant's failure to disclose her status as a corporate officer, a fact of which she was aware, we are unable to disturb the Board's finding that claimant made willful false statements ( see Matter of Jeffery [Commissioner of Labor], 279 A.D.2d 685, 686; Matter of Gross [Hudacs], 195 A.D.2d 742).

Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Spain, Lahtinen and Kane, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Nicotra

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Apr 15, 2004
6 A.D.3d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

In the Matter of Nicotra

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF THE CLAIM OF MARGARET E. NICOTRA, Appellant. COMMISSIONER…

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

Date published: Apr 15, 2004

Citations

6 A.D.3d 909 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
774 N.Y.S.2d 459

Citing Cases

S. v. Clare Rose Inc. (In re Bebbino)

Initially, it is well settled that "whether a claimant is totally unemployed for purposes of receiving…

Clare Rose Inc. v. Comm'r Labor (In re Bebbino)

Initially, it is well settled that "whether a claimant is totally unemployed for purposes of receiving…