In re the Claim of Shapiro, 52 A.D.3d 1139 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). · Go Syfert
In re the Claim of Shapiro, 52 A.D.3d 1139 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
1 citation event across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: In re the Claim of Briggs (nyappdiv, 2011-12-22)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) In re the Claim of Briggs
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · confidence medium
As such, the Board’s determination that claimant was ineligible to receive benefits was supported by a rational basis (see Matter of Shapiro [Incorporated Vil. of Muttontown — Commissioner of Labor], 52 AD3d 1139, 1139 [2008]; Matter of Richman [Commissioner of Labor], 254 AD2d 673, 674 [1998]; Matter of Franconeri [New York City Dept. of Personnel — Hudacs], 190 AD2d at 971 ; compare Matter of Newell [County of Nassau— Commissioner of Labor], 9 AD3d 559, 560 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 610 [2004]).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In the Matter of the Claim of Bernard D. Shapiro, Incorporated Village of Muttontown, Respondent Commissioner of Labor
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jun 26, 2008.
52 A.D.3d 1139
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 4, 2007, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was employed in a major nontenured policymaking or advisory position within the meaning of Labor Law § 565 (2) (e).

Substantial evidence supports the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board’s decision that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits. The record reveals that claimant worked for the Incorporated Village of Muttontown as the Village Administrator. It is not disputed that the employer is a governmental entity and that claimant’s position was untenured. Moreover, the powers and duties of the position of Village Administrator were delineated by Local Law No. 1 (2005) of the Village of Muttontown, which included provisions establishing advisory and policymaking aspects of the job. Given the foregoing, the Board properly determined that Labor Law § 565 (2) (e) precluded claimant from obtaining benefits (see Matter of Newell [County of Nassau—Commissioner of Labor], 9 AD3d 559, 560 [2004], lv denied 3 NY3d 610 [2004]). Accordingly, we decline to disturb the Board’s decision.

[*1140] Mercure, J.P, Peters, Spain, Kane and Malone Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.