Opinion
2016–02634 Index No. 513958/15
04-10-2019
In the Matter of WEI J. HUANG, et al., petitioners, v. INDUSTRIAL BOARD OF APPEALS, et al., respondents.
Robert N. Lerner, Brooklyn, NY, for petitioners. Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Renika Moore, Seth Kupferberg, and C. Michael Higgins of counsel), for respondents.
Robert N. Lerner, Brooklyn, NY, for petitioners.
Letitia James, Attorney General, New York, N.Y. (Renika Moore, Seth Kupferberg, and C. Michael Higgins of counsel), for respondents.
REINALDO E. RIVERA, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, SYLVIA O. HINDS–RADIX, JOSEPH J. MALTESE, JJ.
DECISION & JUDGMENT
Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of the Industrial Board of Appeals dated September 16, 2015, which, after a hearing, dismissed the petitioners' application to review an order to comply issued by the New York State Department of Labor on December 10, 2014, finding, inter alia, that the petitioners failed to pay proper overtime wages.
ADJUDGED that the determination is confirmed, the petition is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
In this proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, the petitioners challenge a determination issued by the Industrial Board of Appeals (hereinafter the IBA) dated September 16, 2015. After a hearing, the IBA dismissed, as untimely, the petitioners' application to review an order to comply issued by the New York State Department of Labor on December 10, 2014, which found that the petitioners failed to pay proper overtime wages. The Supreme Court transferred the proceeding to this Court pursuant to CPLR 7804(g).
There is substantial evidence supporting the determination that the petitioners failed to comply with the 60–day time limit for challenging the order to comply, and that they were properly served with the order to comply pursuant to Labor Law § 33 (see Labor Law § 101[1] ; Matter of Budget Tire Automotive v. O'Dell, 223 A.D.2d 988, 989, 636 N.Y.S.2d 879 ).
The petitioners' remaining contentions are either without merit or not properly before this Court.
RIVERA, J.P., COHEN, HINDS–RADIX and MALTESE, JJ., concur.