Ne. Logistics, Inc. v. Comm'r of Labor (In re Pasini)

• Decision Date: 14 April 2022
• Docket Number: 532535
• Citation: 204 A.D.3d 1187,167 N.Y.S.3d 194
• Parties: In the MATTER OF the Claim of Matthew PASINI, Respondent. Northeast Logistics, Inc., Appellant. v. Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.
• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

204 A.D.3d 1187

167 N.Y.S.3d 194

In the MATTER OF the Claim of Matthew PASINI, Respondent.Northeast Logistics, Inc., Appellant.

v.Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

532535

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, New York.

Calendar Date: March 23, 2022

Decided and Entered: April 14, 2022

Dorf & Nelson LLP, Rye (Andrew P. Marks of counsel), for appellant.

Clea Weiss, Ithaca, for Matthew Pasini, respondent.

Letitia James, Attorney General, New York City (Gary Liebowitz of counsel), for Commissioner of Labor, respondent.

Before: Egan Jr., J.P., Clark, Pritzker, Ceresia and Fisher, JJ.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Clark, J. Appeals from two decisions of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 27, 2020, which ruled that Northeast Logistics, Inc. is liable for unemployment insurance contributions on remuneration paid to claimant and others similarly situated.

Northeast Logistics, Inc. (hereinafter NEL) is a business logistics company that acts as a broker between delivery drivers and clients seeking to have products transported from one location to another. Claimant entered into an agreement with NEL and was directed to deliver auto parts for Any–Part Auto Stores, one of NEL's clients. After this relationship ended, claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits. The Department of Labor issued an initial determination finding that claimant was an employee of NEL and that NEL was liable for unemployment insurance contributions based on remuneration paid to claimant and other similarly situated delivery drivers. NEL objected, and, following a hearing, an Administrative Law Judge sustained NEL's objection and overruled the determination.

Upon review, the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board reversed the decision of the Administrative Law Judge and sustained the Department's determination, finding that claimant was an employee of NEL and therefore was eligible for benefits based upon remuneration paid to him and others similarly situated. NEL appeals.

"Whether there exists an employment relationship is a factual issue for resolution by the Board and its decision will not be disturbed when supported by substantial evidence" ( Matter of Jordan [Alterna Holdings Corp.-Commissioner of Labor], 187 A.D.3d 1264, 1265, 131 N.Y.S.3d 440 [2020] [internal quotation marks and citations omitted]; see Matter of Mayo [Epstein–Commissioner of Labor], 193 A.D.3d 1199, 1199–1200, 145 N.Y.S.3d 675 [2021] ). "Although no single factor is determinative, the relevant inquiry is whether the purported employer exercised control over the results produced or the means used to achieve those results, with control over the latter being the more important factor" ( Matter of Escoffery [Park W. Exec. Servs. Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 180 A.D.3d 1294, 1295, 122 N.Y.S.3d 126 [2020] [citations omitted]; see Matter of McLaughlin [City of Albany–Commissioner of Labor], 199 A.D.3d 1132, 1133, 155 N.Y.S.3d 646 [2021] ). "Substantial evidence consists of proof within the whole record of such quality and quantity as to generate conviction in and persuade a fair and detached fact finder that, from that proof as a premise, a conclusion or ultimate fact may be extracted reasonably — probatively and logically" ( Matter of Yoga Vida NYC, Inc. [Commissioner of Labor], 28 N.Y.3d 1013, 1015, 41 N.Y.S.3d 456, 64 N.E.3d 276 [2016] [internal quotation marks, brackets and citation omitted]; see Matter of Sischo [Safeguard Props. LLC–Commissioner of Labor], 180 A.D.3d 1112, 1113, 120 N.Y.S.3d 435 [2020], lv denied 35 N.Y.3d 915, 2020 WL 6142774 [2020] ).

Notwithstanding this Court's conclusions regarding the employment relationship between NEL and other claimants ( Matter of Chichester [Northeast Logistics, Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 204 A.D.3d 1195, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2022 WL 1115303 [decided herewith]; Matter of Rivera [Northeast Logistics, Inc.-Commissioner of Labor], 204 A.D.3d 1185, 167 N.Y.S.3d 191 [decided herewith]), the record before us does not contain substantial evidence to support the Board's determination that claimant was an employee of NEL for purposes of receiving unemployment insurance benefits. The record reflects that, after NEL initially referred claimant to Any–Part,¹ NEL...