Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

31 WILLIAM F. ARANGUREN v. BOARD OF REVIEW and OCEAN COUNTY VOCATIONAL TECHNICAL SCHOOL -- rank: 709

... letter was a form notice advising appellant in accord with N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c), that the decision "become[s] final, unless, within ten ... 2008, the Board dismissed the appeal as untimely pursuant to N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c). After the 2006-2007 school year, Aranguren filed a ...

docket:	a0802-08
court:	New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2009-11-05
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	11760

32 DIANE A. WAITES v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR -- rank: 705

... that Waites filed the appeal beyond the time prescribed by N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c). The Board noted that Waites had not shown good ... from a decision by the Appeal Tribunal is prescribed by N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c), which states in pertinent part that unless an appeal ... board of review, unless further appeal is initiated pursuant to [ N.J.S.A. 43:21-(6)(e)] within [ten] days after the date of notification or ... mailed its decision to Waites on July 22, 2010. Under N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c), Waites had until August 1, 2010 to file her ... Waites' appeal was not filed within the time prescribed by N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c), and Waites failed to establish good cause for her ...

docket:	a1903-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-11-18
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	13999

33 STEPHEN D. DETAR v. BOARD OF REVIEW -- rank: 702

... Review (Board) dismissing his administrative appeal as untimely, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c). Our review of the record satisfies us that the ... Tribunal's mailing of its February 1, 2103 decision. See N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c). Meanwhile on remand, the Director determined on February 5 ... not file his appeal until March 11, 2013. Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1), an appeal of the Director's decision must ... mailing, which was set forth in the determination Detar received. N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1). The definition of a good cause exception to ... be rescinded upon the filing of a timely appeal. See N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1) (stating unless a claimant files a timely appeal ...

docket:	a6083-12
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2015-04-22
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	15899

34 RUTH I. MICHENER v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR -- rank: 698

... and Lawrence Township, she had to meet the requirements of N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(g)(1) in order to qualify for benefits for any ...

docket:	a5823-09
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-10-11
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	18661

35 LUIGI COPPOLA v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR -- rank: 695

... to the benefit of the two-determination rule, found in N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1), which requires separate findings of eligibility and nondisqualification ...

docket:	a5941-11
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2014-09-05
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	29156

36 /usr/local/share/www/libweb/collections/courts/appellate/a2866-12xx.opn.html -- rank: 695

... to the benefit of the two-determination rule, found in N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1), which requires separate findings of eligibility and nondisqualification ...

docket:
court:	NJ Superior Court Law/Chancery Division
decided:
status:
citation:
Document Size:	28361

37 SHIRLEY A. McGRIFF v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR and NATIONWIDE PARKING & VALET LLC -- rank: 695

... determination. During the time frame relevant to this appeal, 1 N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) specified that the Appeal Tribunal's decision "shall be ... mailing of such decision, further appeal is initiated pursuant to [ N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(e).]" See also Lowden v. Bd. of Review , 78 N ... it would have been deficient on its merits. Affirmed. 1 N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) was revised in 2010 to enlarge the time for ... in this case preceded December 1, 2010, the amendment to N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) is inapplicable. This archive is a service of Rutgers ...

docket:	a0394-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-10-21
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	11970

38 IRMA COTTON v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR and KEEFE COMMISSARY NETWORK LLC -- rank: 692

... with the Board within the strict time frame prescribed by N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) and N.J.A.C. 12:20-4.1 ... of time. During the period relevant to this appeal, 1 N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) specified that the Appeal Tribunal's decision "shall be ... mailing of such decision, further appeal is initiated pursuant to [ N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(e).]" See also Lowden v. Bd. of Review , 78 N ... N.J. Super. 281 , 287 (App. Div. 2011). Affirmed. 1 N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) was revised in 2010 to enlarge the time for ... in this case preceded December 1, 2010, the amendment to N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) is inapplicable. This archive is a service of Rutgers ...

docket:	a0684-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-12-16
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	13067

39 SANDRA H COMARCHO v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR and NEWARK MORNING LEDGER -- rank: 692

... Appeal Tribunal dismissed her appeal as untimely. The decision stated: N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1) provides that an appeal must be filed within ... appeal was properly dismissed in accordance with the provisions of N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1), the Deputy's determination having become final, and ... Review , 78 N.J. Super. 467 , 469 (App. Div. 1963). N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1) provides: Unless the claimant or any interested party ...

docket:	a2988-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2012-06-13
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	28563

40 ALFREDO RAY CARRATALA v. BOARD OF REVIEW and PRESTIGE MOTORS, INC -- rank: 692

... file that appeal within the strict time frame prescribed by N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) and N.J.A.C. 12:20-4.1 ... as it was not filed within the period allowed under N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1), and good cause has not been shown for ... dismissing appellant's appeal as untimely filed. This appeal followed. N.J.S.A. 43:21-6 sets forth the procedure for applying for unemployment benefits and ... the Board's dismissal of appellant's appeal. Affirmed. 1 N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) was amended in 2010 to enlarge the time for ... in this case predated December 1, 2010, the amendment to N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) is inapplicable. This archive is a service of Rutgers ...

docket:	a1283-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2009-04-13
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	15059

41 WILLIAM E. NEWMAN, JR. v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR -- rank: 688

... finding: (1) the appeal was timely filed in accordance with N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1); (2) Newman was disqualified from benefits under N ... initial determination from UC Express, it filed the appeal timely. N.J.S.A. 43:21-(6)(b)(1) sets forth the procedure for appeals of an ... and benefits shall be paid or denied in accordance therewith. . . . [ N.J.S.A. 43:21-(6)(b)(1) (emphasis added).] Lowe's clearly did not file ...

docket:	a2253-09
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2014-02-19
status:	published
citation:	434 N.J.Super. 483 84 A.3d 1042
Document Size:	27268

42 JAMES A. PETERS v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT -- rank: 681

... pursue those appeals in a timely manner as required under N.J.S.A . 43:21-6(c). See Lowden v. Bd. of Review , 78 N.J ... fine, and accrued interest. A ffirmed. 1 We recognize that N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) was amended effective December 1, 2010 to enlarge the ...

docket:	a1451-11
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2012-12-21
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	17179

43 NICHOLAS VALLO JR v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR -- rank: 681

... was not filed within the strict time frame prescribed by N.J.S.A. 43:21- 6(c). We affirm. After approximately sixteen months of employment, on ... of mailing of the . . . Tribunal A-0676-18T4 4 decision ( N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c)); and [g]ood cause not having been shown for ... procedural matter, that his administrative appeal was out of time. N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(c) specifies that the Tribunal's decision 'shall be deemed ... of the [Board], unless further appeal is initiated pursuant to [N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(e)] . . . within [twenty] days after the date of . . . mailing of ...

docket:	a0676-18
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2020-02-25
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	11931

44 JEFFREY HERSH v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR -- rank: 681

... denial of unemployment benefits because his appeal was untimely under N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1) and Hersh failed to establish good cause for ... Appeal Tribunal's January 9, 2019 decision, the examiner explained ' N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1) provides that an appeal must be filed within ... have been filed late without good cause in accordance with N.J.S.A. 43:21- 6(b)(1).' On February 8, 2019, the Board affirmed the ... from a demand for repayment of benefits is governed by N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(b)(1). The statute A-2958-18T2 5 provides that ...

docket:	a2958-18
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2020-10-29
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	11829

45 KRISTY L. SUTTERLEY v. BOARD OF REVIEW DEPARTMENT OF LABOR -- rank: 678

... and employees. N.J.A.C. 12:20-3. Under N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(e), the Board is granted broad authority to review the ... parties to such decision to initiate further appeals before it." N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(e). It is undisputed by the Board's order that ... taking additional evidence as it was within its statutory authority. N.J.S.A. 43:21-6(e); see also Softexture Yarns Inc. v. Bd. of Review ...

docket:	a4274-12
court:	New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2014-11-10
status:	Published
citation:
Document Size:	19053