Majority
Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed August 5, 2005, which ruled that Thomas A. Sirianni, Inc. was liable for additional unemployment insurance contributions based on remuneration paid to claimant and others similarly situated.
Claimant worked for Thomas A. Sirianni, Inc. as an attorney witness and notary for real estate closings. After her employment ended, claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits. The Department of Labor initially determined that claimant was an employee of Sirianni and that Sirianni was liable for contributions based on remuneration paid to claimant and all other persons similarly situated. Sirianni objected on the ground that claimant was an independent contractor. After a hearing, the Administrative Law Judge sustained the initial determination and the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board affirmed. Sirianni now appeals.
The existence of an employer-employee relationship is a factual issue for the Board to resolve and its determination will not be disturbed so long as it is supported by substantial evidence (see Matter of Concourse Ophthalmology Assoc. [Roberts], 60 NY2d 734 , 736 [1983]; Matter of O’Neil-Haight [County of Yates—Commissioner of Labor], 34 AD3d 1041 , 1042 [2006]). “[T]he existence of ‘other evidence (even the greater weight of the evidence) supporting an opposing determination merely ere-
In this case, there is testimony in the record indicating, among other things, that Siriani recruited claimant through an advertisement in an alumni publication (see Matter of La Fleur [LTI, Inc.—Commissioner of Labor], 27 AD3d 935 , 936 [2006], lv dismissed 7 NY3d 783 [2006]; Matter of Guidicipietro [Hariton & D’Angelo, LLP—Commissioner of Labor], 24 AD3d 1159 , 1159 [2005]), interviewed her prior to hiring her (see Matter of O’Neil-Haight [County of Yates—Commissioner of Labor], supra at 1042), scheduled the closings, required her to submit time sheets, collected fees from the customers and paid claimant directly (see Matter of Abramson [Commissioner of Labor], 29 AD3d 1191 , 1192 [2006]; Matter of Joseph Weinstein Elec. Corp. [Commissioner of Labor], 295 AD2d 767 , 767 [2002]).
This Court has previously held that “an organization which screens the services of professionals, pays them at a set rate and then offers their services to clients exercises sufficient control to create an employment relationship” (Matter of Kimberg [Hudacs], 188 AD2d 781 , 781 [1992]). Although there is testimony in the record which would support a contrary conclusion, we find substantial evidence to support the Board’s determination (see Matter of Rosenthal [Commissioner of Labor], 256 AD2d 711 [1998]). The fact that claimant signed a written agreement identifying her as an independent contractor does not compel a different result (see Matter of Noel [Life Alert Emergency Response, Inc.—Commissioner of Labor], 38 AD3d 1082 , 1084 [2007]; Matter of Kelly [Frank Gallo, Inc.—Commissioner of
Mercure, J.E, Spain, Carpinello, Mugglin and Kane, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
Cases cited
- In re Concourse Ophthalmology Associates, P. C. 60 NY2d 734 at 736 p. 498
- In re the Claim of O'Neil-Haight 34 AD3d 1041 at 1042 p. 498
- In re the Claim of Westney 262 AD2d 894 at 896 p. 499
- In re the Claim of Eisner 252 AD2d 847 at 848 p. 499
- In re Medical Transcription Plus, Inc. 302 AD2d 689 at 690 p. 499
- In re Saalfield 37 AD3d 928 at 929 p. 499
- In re International Student Exchange, Inc. 302 AD2d 834 at 835 p. 499
- In re the Claim of Bedin 257 AD2d 809 at 810 p. 499
- In re the Claim of La Fleur 27 AD3d 935 at 936 p. 499
- In re the Claim of Guidicipietro 24 AD3d 1159 at 1159 p. 499
- In re the Claim of Abramson 29 AD3d 1191 at 1192 p. 499
- In re Joseph Weinstein Electric Corp. 295 AD2d 767 at 767 p. 499
- In re Kimberg 188 AD2d 781 at 781 p. 499
- In re Rosenthal 256 AD2d 711 p. 499
- In re the Claims of Noel 38 AD3d 1082 at 1084 p. 499
- In re the Claim of Kelly 28 AD3d 1044 at 1045 p. 500