Opinion
February 7, 1991
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
The conclusion that claimant was in business for himself during the period he was receiving unemployment insurance benefits is amply supported by the record. Although on his application form for benefits he answered in the negative when asked whether he was engaged in a business, the evidence revealed that he had filed a certificate of doing business indicating that he was transacting business in the computer field. He had business cards, was buying computer equipment and filed tax returns for the business. Therefore, the decision that claimant was not totally unemployed is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Carasso [Catherwood], 23 A.D.2d 935). The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board was free to reject claimant's contention that while he was in business for himself when he was working full time for another company, he stopped his business when he lost that job (see, Matter of Ruperto [Roberts], 89 A.D.2d 1039). The Board also properly determined that the overpayment in benefits was recoverable (see, Labor Law § 597; Matter of Barber [Roberts], 121 A.D.2d 767) and the facts support the further conclusion that claimant made willful false statements in order to obtain benefits (see, Matter of Petty [Roberts], 90 A.D.2d 604).
Decision affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P.J., Casey, Weiss, Crew III and Harvey, JJ., concur.