Opinion
Decided and Entered: September 20, 2001.
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed June 20, 2000, which charged claimant with a recoverable overpayment of unemployment insurance benefits.
Linda J. Blankenship, Verplanck, appellant in person.
Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General (Steven Segall of counsel), New York City, for respondent.
Before: Cardona, P.J., Mercure, Crew III, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was bound by its prior decision, affirmed by this Court on appeal ( 282 A.D.2d 861), that claimant was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits because she had been hired as a per diem substitute cleaner whose hours varied according to the employer's needs and she quit her employment due to a reduced work schedule. Inasmuch as substantial evidence supports the present finding that claimant received unemployment insurance benefits based upon her false testimony that she was a full-time employee who was laid off due to lack of work, we find no reason to disturb the Board's decision to charge claimant with a recoverable overpayment of benefits (see, Labor Law § 597). Furthermore, claimant's attempt to again challenge the merits of her disqualification for unemployment insurance benefits is not properly before this Court (see, Matter of Levine [Commissioner of Labor], 284 A.D.2d 599, 600 725 N.Y.S.2d 582, 583).
ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs.