New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Labor Law § 527 (2026)

Valid original claim

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 527. Valid original claim. 1. Basic condition. "Valid original
claim" is a claim filed by a claimant who meets the following
qualifications:  (a) is able to work, and available for work; (b) is not
subject to any disqualification or suspension under this article; (c)
his or her previously established benefit year, if any, has expired; (d)
has been paid remuneration by employers liable for contributions or for
payments in lieu of contributions under this article, other than
employers from whom the claimant lost employment and for which the
commissioner makes a determination disqualifying the claimant for
misconduct pursuant to subdivisions three and six of section five
hundred ninety-three of this article, for employment during at least two
calendar quarters of the base period, with remuneration of one and
one-half times the high calendar quarter remuneration within the base
period and with at least two hundred twenty-one times the minimum wage
established under subdivision one of section six hundred fifty-two of
this chapter rounded down to the nearest one hundred dollars of such
remuneration being paid during the high calendar quarter of such base
period. For purposes of this section, the remuneration in the high
calendar quarter of the base period used in determining a valid original
claim shall not exceed an amount equal to twenty-two times the maximum
benefit rate as set forth in subdivision five of section five hundred
ninety of this article for all individuals.
  2. Alternate condition. (a) An individual who is unable to file a
valid original claim in accordance with subdivision one of this section,
files a valid original claim by meeting the qualifications enumerated in
paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of subdivision one of this section and by
having been paid remuneration by employers liable for contributions or
for payments in lieu of contributions under this article, other than
employers from whom the claimant lost employment and for which the
commissioner makes a determination disqualifying the claimant for
misconduct pursuant to subdivisions three and six of section five
hundred ninety-three of this article, for employment during at least two
calendar quarters of the base period, with remuneration of one and
one-half times the high calendar quarter remuneration within the base
period and with at least two hundred twenty-one times the minimum wage
established under subdivision one of section six hundred fifty-two of
this chapter rounded down to the nearest one hundred dollars of such
remuneration being paid during the high calendar quarter of such base
period. For purposes of this section, the remuneration in the high
calendar quarter of the base period used in determining a valid original
claim shall not exceed an amount equal to twenty-two times the maximum
benefit rate as set forth in subdivision five of section five hundred
ninety of this article for all individuals.
  (b) An individual who is able to file a valid original claim in
accordance with subdivision one of this section, may make an application
to the commissioner to determine his or her entitlement to benefits and
benefit rate pursuant to paragraph (a) of this subdivision under the
following conditions:
  (i) The claimant must file such application within ten days of the
date the monetary determination was mailed by the department.
  (ii) In those circumstances where a wage data report in relation to
the alternate condition is not due or has not been received, the
claimant must provide proof of remuneration paid for such quarter to the
commissioner's satisfaction in order for the claimant's application to
be considered.
  (iii) Under those circumstances where such application results in the
claimant being able to file a valid original claim under the basic
condition and the alternate condition, the claimant may select the
condition to be utilized.
  3. Disability. In the case of a claimant who did not file a valid
original claim solely because the claimant was not paid sufficient
remuneration and who received workers' compensation payments or any
benefits paid pursuant to the volunteer firefighters' benefit law during
the base period specified in subdivision one of section five hundred
twenty of this article, said period shall be extended. The term of the
extension shall be equivalent to the number of calendar quarters during
which the claimant received such payments, but shall not exceed two
calendar quarters.
  4. General condition. A valid original claim may be filed only in a
week that qualifies as an effective week of unemployment for the
claimant.
  5. Utilization of wage credits. Remuneration used to establish a valid
original claim pursuant to subdivision one, two or three of this
section, may not be considered for the purpose of establishing a
subsequent valid original claim except as provided by section five
hundred twenty-eight of this article.
  6. Work requirement. An individual who has filed a previous valid
original claim pursuant to this section must have worked in employment
and been paid remuneration for such work since the beginning of such
previous claim in an amount equal to at least ten times the claimant's
weekly benefit rate in order to be able to file a subsequent valid
original claim.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 97 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1971–2025 · leading case: In re the Claim of Stennett, 54 A.D.3d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008).
In re the Claim of Stennett, 54 A.D.3d 478 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008). · cites it 4× “Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed October 5, 2007, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because he was unable to file a valid original claim for benefits pursuant to Labor Law § 527. In June…”
Matter of Bogart (Commr. of Labor), 140 A.D.3d 1217 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). · cites it 2× “When claimant – who had been a long-haul trucker – filed for unemployment insurance benefits after his work with another company ended, the Department of Labor indicated to him that his earlier time with LaValle might be considered as part of his necessary employment history…”
Matter of Kelly (Commr. of Labor), 145 A.D.3d 1306 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). · cites it 2× “In order to file a valid claim for unemployment insurance benefits, claimant was required to show that he earned “remuneration of one and one-half times the high calendar quarter remuneration within the base period” (Labor Law § 527 [1] [d]; [2] [a]; see Matter of Lingshan Li…”
In re the Claim of Fiorino, 34 A.D.3d 892 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006). · cites it 6× “An Administrative Law Judge ruled that he was unable to file a valid original claim under Labor Law § 527 because he did not have sufficient earnings in his extended base period.”
Matter of Restrepo (Comm'r of Labor), 2023 NY Slip Op 03891 (N.Y. App. Div. 2023). · cites it 3× “"Labor Law § 527 (1) and (2) set forth the requirements for filing a valid original claim for unemployment insurance benefits under either the basic condition or the alternate condition" ( Matter of Best [Commissioner of Labor] , 172 AD3d 1845 , 1845 [3d Dept 2019] [internal…”
Rabenstein v. Sealift, Inc., 18 F. Supp. 3d 343 (E.D.N.Y 2014). · cites it 2× “26, 2013) (citing N.Y. Labor Law § 527 ); Butt v. Comm’r of Soc.”
In re the Claim of Gruber, 674 N.E.2d 1354 (NY 1996). “1 Here, we are concerned with the construction of the term "last employment” as used in that section.”
Torres v. New York State Dep't of Labor, 321 F. Supp. 432 (S.D.N.Y. 1971). · cites it 2× “" ( N.Y. Labor Law § 527 (1) (McKinney Supp.1970)).”
In re the Claim of Sotomayor, 34 A.D.3d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006). · cites it 2× “The Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board ruled that she was ineligible to receive benefits because she did not have sufficient earnings in her base period to file a valid original claim under Labor Law § 527. It adhered to this decision upon reconsideration and this appeal ensued.”
In re the Claim of Santiago, 63 A.D.3d 1357 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009). · cites it 2× “Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed September 24, 2008, which ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she was unable to file a subsequent valid original claim pursuant to Labor Law § 527. Claimant…”
In re the Claim of Okumakpeyi, 295 A.D.2d 828 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002). · cites it 2× “Following a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge denied his claim on the grounds that claimant did not comply with reporting requirements and was unable to file a valid original claim because his base period employment was excluded due to the fact, inter alia, that he did not…”
In re the Claim of Umpierre, 80 A.D.3d 1123 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). “At the end of that benefit year, claimant reapplied— effective February 23, 2009 — for unemployment insurance benefits and was found to have a valid original claim that entitled him to renewed regular benefits, albeit at a rate substantially lower than that paid in the previous…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.