From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Rhodes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 5, 1998
247 A.D.2d 689 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

February 5, 1998

Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


Claimant was an outside salesperson for Aspex Eyewear, Inc., an eyeglass frame distributor. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that Aspex was liable for additional contributions based on remuneration paid to claimant and others similarly situated upon a finding that claimant was an employee and not an independent contractor. We affirm. The record establishes that Aspex delineated claimant's sales territory, exercised final approval over all sales orders, supplied claimant with business cards and a toll-free number for customer calls, tracked claimant's productivity levels, determined claimant's rate of compensation without negotiation, provided training and performed all customer billing, collection and shipping functions. In our view, the foregoing constitutes substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that Aspex exercised sufficient direction and control over claimant's work to establish an employer-employee relationship under the Labor Law (see, Matter of Rivera [State Line Delivery Serv. — Roberts], 69 N.Y.2d 679, 682, cert denied 481 U.S. 1049; Matter of Preble [Getting to Know You Intl. #2 — Hudacs], 206 A.D.2d 650).

Mercure, J. P., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Carpinello, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Rhodes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Feb 5, 1998
247 A.D.2d 689 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Matter of Rhodes

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of LAURIE A. RHODES, Respondent. ASPEX EYEWEAR…

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

Date published: Feb 5, 1998

Citations

247 A.D.2d 689 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
668 N.Y.S.2d 759

Citing Cases

Tura, Inc. v. Comm'r of Labor (In re Rosenblum)

The agreement also contained a noncompete clause, which prohibited claimant from working for companies that…