Since Harold Wapnick offered essentially nothing more than a self-serving statement that he had no employees, it was not unreasonable for the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board to determine that, based on the evidence it had, Wapnick exercised sufficient direction and control over three other people performing services at his office as to establish their status as employees (see, Matter of Cohen [Blinder, Robinson & Co. — Roberts],
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
MATTER OF WAPNICK
167 A.D.2d 622 (1990)
In the Matter of Harold Wapnick, Appellant. Thomas F. Hartnett, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
November 8, 1990
November 8, 1990
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Third Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.
