Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997

In re the Claim of Monro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided January 23, 1997

235 A.D.2d 885; 653 N.Y.S.2d 46; 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 532

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

In re the Claim of Wach (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
In re the Claim of DiPietro (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
In re the Claim of Kelly (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
In re the Claim of Moreira (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
In re the Claim of Palmer (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1998)
In re the Claim of Roland (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
In re the Claim of Fitton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
In re the Claim of De Vaul (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
In re the Claim of Murak (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 6, 1995, which, inter alia, ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was not totally unemployed.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board finding that claimant was not totally unemployed at the time he was receiving unemployment insurance benefits and charging him with a recoverable overpayment. Claimant was involved in three family businesses: an auto body shop whose certificate of doing business was in claimant’s name and for which claimant signed checks, *886an auto parts salvage business licensed in claimant’s name and operating out of property owned by claimant, and a seasonal trucking business wherein claimant operated his dump truck at construction sites. That the businesses were not remunerative or not in full operation during the relevant time period, or that claimant’s activities therein were minimal, does not preclude the finding that claimant was not totally unemployed (see, Matter of Ruqus [Sweeney], 232 AD2d 717, 718; Matter of Gross [Hudacs], 195 AD2d 742).

White, J. P., Casey, Yesawich Jr., Peters and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.