New York Consolidated Laws
N.Y. Labor Law § 621 (2026)
Appeals to appeal board
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NY-LEGnysenate.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
§ 621. Appeals to appeal board. 1. Disputed claims for benefits. Within twenty days after the mailing or personal delivery of notice of the decision of a referee on contested benefit claims, the claimant and the employer, provided he appeared at the hearing, may appeal to the appeal board by filing a notice of appeal in the local state employment office in accordance with such rules as the appeal board shall prescribe. Within the same period of time and in the same manner, the commissioner may also appeal to the appeal board, regardless of whether or not he appeared or was represented at the hearing before the referee. 2. Contested determinations, rules, or orders. Within twenty days after the mailing or personal delivery of notice of the decision after a hearing on contested determinations, rules or orders by the commissioner, the employer may take an appeal to the appeal board, provided he appeared at the hearing, by filing a notice of appeal with the commissioner, and the commissioner may likewise within such period take an appeal to the board by giving written notice thereof to the employer, regardless of whether or not the commissioner appeared or was represented at the hearing before the referee. 3. Conduct of appeals. The appeal board may decide any case appealed to it under any provision of this article on the basis of the record and of evidence previously submitted in such case, or it may in its discretion hear argument or hold a further hearing, or remand such case to a referee for such purposes as it may direct. If a further hearing is to be held or argument had, the board shall fix a time therefor and shall notify the commissioner, regardless of whether or not he had appeared or been represented at the hearing before the referee, and any other party affected, provided such other party appeared at the hearing before the referee. The board may affirm or reverse, wholly or in part, or may modify the decision appealed from and shall render its decision promptly and shall thereupon send written notice thereof together with the reasons therefor to the commissioner and any other party affected thereby who appeared at the hearing before the referee.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 126
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: In re the Claim of Miller, 9 A.D.3d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004).
In re the Claim of Miller, 9 A.D.3d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). “We initially address claimant’s argument that the Board abused its discretion in declining to consider, in the first instance, certain evidence not introduced at the hearing.”
In re the Claim of Green, 87 A.D.3d 1222 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). ““Labor Law § 621 (1) requires that an appeal to the Board from an ALJ’s decision must be made within 20 days of the date the decision is mailed or personally delivered .”
Matter of Paladino (Commr. of Labor), 140 A.D.3d 1496 (N.Y. App. Div. 2016). ““Labor Law § 621 (1) requires that an appeal from a decision of an [ALJ] be taken within 20 days of the date the *1497 decision is mailed or personally delivered, and this time requirement is strictly construed” (Matter of Matteo [Commissioner of Labor], 134 AD3d 1307, 1307…”
Matter of Page (Comm'r of Labor), 2017 NY Slip Op 5498 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). “On September 9, 2016, over eight months later, claimant faxed a letter to the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board appealing the ALJ’s decision.”
In re the Claim of Averett, 65 A.D.3d 1436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009). “The ALJ conducted another hearing and, by decision dated and mailed on April 29, 2008, again concluded that claimant lost his employment due to misconduct. Claimant waited until October 9, 2008 to appeal this decision, which he labeled as a request to reopen.”
Matter of Alford (Comm'r of Labor), 2017 NY Slip Op 6502 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017). ““Labor Law § 621 (1) provides that an appeal to the Board from a decision of an ALJ must be made within 20 days of the mailing or personal delivery of the decision, and this time requirement is strictly construed” (Matter of Davis [Commissioner of Labor], 144 AD3d 1307, 1307…”
In re the Claim of Moorer, 40 A.D.3d 1335 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). “Labor Law § 621 (1) requires that appeals to the Board must be filed within 20 days after the mailing of a notice of decision, and this statute is strictly construed (see Matter of Orologio [Hudacs], 193 AD2d 1042 , 1043 [1993]).”
In re the Claim of Harris, 45 A.D.3d 1031 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007). “Notwithstanding claimant’s proffered excuse that she relied upon her attorney to appeal the Administrative Law Judge’s decision, we conclude that the Board properly dismissed the appeal as untimely inasmuch as claimant failed to comply with the strict 20-day time period set…”
In re the Claim of Berisha, 89 A.D.3d 1309 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011). “Appeals to the Board are to be taken within 20 days of the mailing or personal delivery of an ALJ’s decision and this time requirement is strictly construed (see Labor Law § 621 [1]; Matter of Averett [Commissioner of Labor], 65 AD3d 1436, 1436-1437 [2009]; Matter of Palmatier…”
In re Ortiz, 70 A.D.3d 1104 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010). “A hearing was thereafter held on the issue of the timeliness of claimant’s appeal before the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, which concluded that the appeal was untimely and that she failed to present a good cause for the lateness of the appeal.”
In re the Claim of Pokigo, 156 A.D.2d 855 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989). “Turning to claimant’s remaining arguments, we find no abuse of discretion in the Board’s decision to deny Superior’s request for a rehearing to present further evidence as to claimant’s alleged status (see, Labor Law § 621 [3]; Matter of Capital Hill Reporting [Ross] 64 AD2d 778…”
In re the Claim of Plotnik, 13 A.D.3d 700 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004). “Although that decision notified claimant that he had 20 days in which to appeal, he failed to read all of the appeal instructions and did not appeal the decision until January 13, 2004.”
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.