In re the Claim of Ruqus
Opinion of the Court
—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 3, 1995, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.
As a result of claimant’s affiliation with a business owned and operated by his wife, the Board found claimant ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed. The Board further charged claimant with a recoverable overpayment of benefits and reduced his right to receive future benefits on the basis that he willfully made false statements. Claimant appeals from the Board’s decision, arguing that the activities which he performed on behalf of his wife’s business were minimal and did not render him ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits. Based upon our review of the record, we find this argument to be unpersuasive.
Claimant stated that he and his wife started a business known as Chip’s Diner in the late 1970s and that his wife filed
Mikoll, J. P., Mercure, Casey, Spain and Carpinello, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.