Matter Claim James D. Bailey Book Reviews

Matter Claim James D. Bailey by Supreme Court of New York Book Summary

Appeal by claimant from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board holding that claimant was not totally unemployed within the meaning of section 522 of the Labor Law and that benefits received in the amount of $1,170 are recoverable under subdivision 4 of section 597 of the Labor Law. Claimant, a carpenter, filed a claim for benefits effective November 30, 1959 and for the next 26 weeks through June 5, 1960 actually received benefits. While each week claimant certified to total unemployment, the record reveals he devoted from 20 to 80 hours each week on the construction of a four-unit motel on property which he owned. On an adjacent parcel, also owned by claimant, a restaurant was situated on which claimant and his father had also done most of the construction work. The restaurant was opened by claimant's wife in October, 1959. In January, 1960, claimant, his wife, his father and his mother formed a partnership to operate the restaurant and the motel. The motel was completed and open for business on June 16, 1960. Claimant urges reversal of the board's determination that he was not totally unemployed. While claimant admits that the self-employed individual is not totally unemployed within the meaning of section 522 (Matter of Schreiber [ Lubin ], 5 A.D.2d 745; Matter of Bunzl [ Lubin ], 1 A.D.2d 46; Matter of Emery [ Corsi ], 281 App. Div. 426) he contends that these decisions do not apply here because since the motel was not completed and opened for business until June 16, 1960, he received no monetary reward for his activities during the entire period he was receiving unemployment benefits. Admittedly, in defining the term ""employment"" as utilized in section 522 the courts have talked in terms of ""work for profit or remuneration"" (Matter of Emery [ Corsi ], supra, p. 427). We do not, however, construe such language to require that the activity result in an immediate monetary reward. It is enough that the activity engaged in is a business venture designed to produce an eventual profit. Surely whether the self-employed's venture is a success or a failure should not be the test of his employment status. By the same token the fact that the activity here involved was preparatory to the production of any income does not dispel the profit motive in the activity and thus bring it within the scope of section 522. The board has held that benefits received

👋 Do you love Matter Claim James D. Bailey books? Please share your friends!

Matter Claim James D. Bailey (Supreme Court of New York) Book Reviews 2024

Supreme Court of New York - Matter Claim James D. Bailey Discussions & Comments

Have you read this book yet? What do you think about Matter Claim James D. Bailey by Supreme Court of New York book? Ask the bookpedia.co community a question about Matter Claim James D. Bailey!