Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sussman v. Board of Review

July 10, 2008

MIRIAM SUSSMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, AND TEMPLE BETH AHM, RESPONDENTS.



On appeal from the Board of Review, Department of Labor, 154,159.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted May 29, 2008

Before Judges Sapp-Peterson and Messano.

Appellant Miriam Sussman appeals from the final decision of the Board of Review (the Board) that affirmed the decision of the Appeal Tribunal denying her application for unemployment benefits. We have considered the arguments raised on appeal in light of the record and applicable legal standards. We affirm.

The undisputed record reveals that Sussman filed her claim for unemployment benefits on June 19, 2007, the day following her dismissal as pre-school director for Temple Beth Ahm, a synagogue located in Springfield. On June 22, 2007, the Department of Labor and Workforce Development determined her claim was "invalid" because "[d]uring the base year, there were fewer than twenty [] base weeks," and she "earned less than $7200 in wages covered by the Unemployment Compensation Law [UCL] []."

Sussman appealed that decision to the Appeal Tribunal, and a hearing was held on July 13, 2007, before the appeals examiner. Sussman testified that she had worked at Temple Beth Ahm since July 1991, and was "fired" on June 18, 2007. Sussman worked as director of the pre-school at the synagogue, though she also earned some money at "Saturday Services." The examiner explained that "the only issue here [is] whether you worked in covered employment in order to receive unemployment benefits."

After requesting further documentation from Sussman, and adjourning the hearing, the examiner reconvened the proceedings via telephone. The following exchange took place:

Examiner: Q: You're being paid . . . by the Synagogue, right?

Sussman: A: Yes.

Q: Okay. And the daycare is a part of that Synagogue?

A: Actually, the daycare is the . . . . Yeah. Yeah . . . I used to do Saturday Services.

Q: Okay.

A: Okay. That wasn't part of the day . . . ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.