From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of the Claim of Halper

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 18, 1998
251 A.D.2d 875 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

June 18, 1998

Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.


After reopening claimant's case, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive benefits because he was not totally unemployed, charged him with a recoverable overpayment of $300 and reduced his right to future benefits upon a finding that he willfully made false statements to obtain benefits. The hearing evidence established that claimant submitted time sheets to his employer indicating that he worked over 51 hours during the' period he was receiving benefits and that' the employer compensated him for his services. In our view, this proof provides substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that claimant was not totally unemployed while he was collecting benefits and that he made willful false statements in order to obtain benefits ( see, Matter of Tenore [Sweeney], 244 A.D.2d 749; Matter of Solieri [Sweeney], 228 A.D.2d 754). Claimant's denial that he performed services for the employer on the dates in question created a credibility issue for the Board to resolve ( see, Matter of Benedetto [Stuart R. Nadelson, P. C. — Sweeney], 239 A.D.2d 726). We will not disturb the determination because of the employer's failure to produce a witness as ordered by the Board since the record shows that it made a diligent effort to secure the witness' attendance. Moreover, claimant did not object to the Administrative Law Judge's determination not to adjourn the hearing so that a subpoena could be issued to the witness ( see, Matter of Acabeo [New York City Bd. of Educ. — Sweeney], 234 A.D.2d 851). Finally, there is nothing to prevent the Board from relying upon hearsay testimony in granting the employer's application to reopen the case ( see, 12 NYCRR 461.8). We have reviewed claimant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.

Cardona, P. J., Crew III, White, Yesawich Jr. and Peters, JJ., concur.

Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Matter of the Claim of Halper

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 18, 1998
251 A.D.2d 875 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Matter of the Claim of Halper

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of EDWARD D. HALPER, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF…

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

Date published: Jun 18, 1998

Citations

251 A.D.2d 875 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
675 N.Y.S.2d 381

Citing Cases

Matter of the Claim of Liposki

The record reflects that Citifloral failed to raise any of the objections now pressed on appeal at the…

In the Matter of Schulman

It is well settled that "whether a person is totally unemployed is a factual issue which is in the sole…