Opinion
519643
07-30-2015
In the Matter of the Claim of Andrew C. STEVENS, Respondent. Gannett Company Inc., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. (Claim No. 1.) In the Matter of the Claim of Ryan S. Plouffe, Respondent. Gannett Company Inc., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. (Claim No. 2.) In the Matter of the Claim of Michelle L. Tompkins, Respondent. Gannett Company Inc., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. (Claim No. 3.) In the Matter of the Claim of Maudestine Hart, Respondent. Gannett Company Inc., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. (Claim No. 4.) In the Matter of the Claim of Jason A. Crawford, Respondent. Gannett Company Inc., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. (Claim No. 5.) In the Matter of the Claim of Christian P. Wiedemann, Respondent. Gannett Company Inc., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. (Claim No. 6.) In the Matter of the Claim of Rhonda M. Lynch, Respondent. Gannett Company Inc., Appellant. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent. (Claim No. 7.).
Bond Schoeneck & King, PLLC, Syracuse (Peter A. Jones of counsel) and The Zinser Law Firm, P.C., Nashville, Tennessee (L. Michael Zinser admitted pro hac vice), for appellant. James W. Cooper, Warrensburg, for Andrew C. Stevens and others, respondents. Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke, LLP, New York City (Mark A. Fowler of counsel), for New York News Publishers Association, amicus curiae.
Bond Schoeneck & King, PLLC, Syracuse (Peter A. Jones of counsel) and The Zinser Law Firm, P.C., Nashville, Tennessee (L. Michael Zinser admitted pro hac vice), for appellant.
James W. Cooper, Warrensburg, for Andrew C. Stevens and others, respondents.
Satterlee Stephens Burke & Burke, LLP, New York City (Mark A. Fowler of counsel), for New York News Publishers Association, amicus curiae.
Before: LAHTINEN, J.P., LYNCH, DEVINE and CLARK, JJ.
Opinion
Devine, J.Appeals from 14 decisions of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed December 19, 2013, December 24, 2013, December 30, 2013, January 10, 2014 and January 14, 2014, which ruled, among other things, that Gannett Company Inc. is liable for additional unemployment insurance contributions on remuneration paid to claimants and others similarly situated.
The present appeals bear a striking similarity to prior ones in which we found substantial evidence to support decisions of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board holding that claimants who contracted with Gannett Company Inc. or Gannett Satellite Information Network, Inc. to deliver newspapers and other publications were employees of those entities (see Matter of Travis [Gannett Satellite Info. Network, Inc.-Commissioner of Labor],
127 A.D.3d 1349, 1349, 5 N.Y.S.3d 623 [2015] ; Matter of Gager [Gannett Satellite Info. Network, Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 127 A.D.3d 1348, 1348–1349, 4 N.Y.S.3d 784 [2015] ; Matter of Hunter [Gannett Co., Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 125 A.D.3d 1166, 1167–1168, 3 N.Y.S.3d 195 [2015] ; Matter of Armison [Gannett Co., Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 122 A.D.3d 1101, 1102–1103, 995 N.Y.S.2d 856 [2014], lv. dismissed 24 N.Y.3d 1209, 4 N.Y.S.3d 590, 28 N.E.3d 24 [2015] ). Suffice it to say, we perceive no factual distinctions that would warrant a different result in the appeals now before us. Gannett's remaining arguments have been examined and are wholly without merit.
ORDERED that the decisions are affirmed, without costs.
LAHTINEN, J.P., LYNCH and CLARK, JJ., concur.