From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Claim of Strujan

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Nov 27, 2013
111 A.D.3d 1239 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-11-27

In the Matter of the Claim of Elena STRUJAN, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF LABOR, Respondent.

Elena Strujan, New York City, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Gary Leibowitz of counsel), for respondent.


Elena Strujan, New York City, appellant pro se. Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, New York City (Gary Leibowitz of counsel), for respondent.

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 12, 2012, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive emergency unemployment compensation benefits.

Claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits effective in September 2008, which were paid for the full period authorized by statute ( seeLabor Law §§ 521, 590[4] ). She thereafter received emergency unemployment compensation (hereinafter EUC) benefits, “which were paid to individuals who had ‘exhausted all rights to regular compensation under the [s]tate law or under [f]ederal law with respect to a benefit year’ ” (Matter of Umpierre [Commissioner of Labor], 80 A.D.3d 1123, 1123, 914 N.Y.S.2d 921 [2011], quoting Pub. L. No. 110–252, tit. IV, § 4001 [b] [1], 122 U.S. Stat. 2323). Claimant reapplied for unemployment insurance benefits when that benefit year ended in October 2009, and was found to have a valid original claim that entitled her to renewed regular benefits at a significantly lower rate. The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board determined that claimant was not entitled to ongoing EUC benefits due to her renewed eligibility for regular benefits, and she now appeals.

We affirm. Substantial evidence supports the Board's determination that claimant had earned sufficient income to permit her to make a valid original claim when she reapplied for unemployment insurance benefits in October 2009 ( seeLabor Law §§ 516, 527[1] ). Claimant had accordingly not exhausted her right to receive regular benefits during that period and, as a result, the Board properly refused to award her ongoing EUC benefits ( see Matter of Umpierre [Commissioner of Labor], 80 A.D.3d at 1123–1124, 914 N.Y.S.2d 921).

ORDERED that the decision is affirmed, without costs. STEIN, J.P., McCARTHY, SPAIN and GARRY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In re Claim of Strujan

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.
Nov 27, 2013
111 A.D.3d 1239 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

In re Claim of Strujan

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Claim of Elena STRUJAN, Appellant. COMMISSIONER OF…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Date published: Nov 27, 2013

Citations

111 A.D.3d 1239 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 7920
975 N.Y.S.2d 705

Citing Cases

In re the Claim of Weeden

Claimant resigned from that position in May 2011, and thereafter received federally-funded emergency…

Weeden v. Comm'r of Labor

Claimant had previously worked for the employer, and returned to its employ in January 2011 as a district…