Opinion
May 16, 1991
Appeal from the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board.
The conclusion that claimant was the sole officer and share-holder of an ongoing insurance brokerage business while she was receiving unemployment insurance benefits is amply supported by the record. Although on her application form claimant answered in the negative when asked whether she was engaged in a business that may bring in income, the evidence reveals that claimant had business cards and stationery printed, maintained a telephone for the business, and used a car purchased and insured in the corporation's name. In addition, she co-brokered insurance for which she received commissions and, as required by law, opened two brokerage accounts in a bank. Therefore, the decision that claimant was not totally unemployed is supported by substantial evidence (see, Matter of Muller [Levine], 50 A.D.2d 1005, lv denied 40 N.Y.2d 806; see also, Matter of Witham [Roberts], 134 A.D.2d 752). The Board also properly determined that the overpayment in benefits was recoverable (see, Matter of Barber [Roberts], 121 A.D.2d 767), and the facts support the further conclusion that claimant made willful false statements (see, Matter of Petty [Roberts], 90 A.D.2d 604, 605).
Decision affirmed, without costs. Weiss, J.P., Yesawich, Jr., Levine, Mercure and Harvey, JJ., concur.