You are here: / / CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION...
, ,

CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND COMMUNITY SUPERVISION (DOCCS) WERE NOT ENTITLED TO “PANDEMIC UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE” DURING THE SUMMER OF 2020 PURSUANT TO THE “CORONAVIRUS AID, RELIEF AND ECONOMIC SECURITY (CARES) ACT;” THE COURT’S ANALYSIS IS TOO DETAILED TO FAIRLY SUMMARIZE HERE (CT APP).

The Court of Appeals, in a full-fledged opinion by Judge Singas, determined certain employees of the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS) who were not offered employment during the summer of 2020 because of the COVID-19 pandemic were not entitled to “pandemic unemployment assistance” under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act. The opinion has a detailed analysis of the federal and state unemployment insurance systems and how they interact with the COVID-related legislation. Matter of Klosterman v New York State Dept. of Corr. & Community Supervision, 2025 NY Slip Op 06960, CtApp 12-16-25

 

You might also like
“TRIAL PREPARATION” EXCEPTION TO A DETERMINATION WHETHER A PHOTOGRAPHIC DISPLAY IS UNDULY SUGGESTIVE, IN THE FORM OF A HERNER HEARING, SHOULD NO LONGER BE EMPLOYED.
Rule Allowing Testing of Horses for Speed-Enhancing Drugs at Times Other than Just Before a Race Is a Valid Exercise of Racing & Wagering Board’s Authority
Unearned Hourly Fees and Contingency Fees Are Not the Property of a Dissolved Law Partnership
DEFENSE COUNSEL INEFFECTIVE FOR FAILING TO REQUEST A JURY CHARGE ON THE ONLY DEFENSE AVAILABLE TO THE DEFENDANT; THREE JUDGE DISSENT FOCUSED ON THE WEAKNESS OF THE DEFENSE (CT APP).
THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FEES FOR CIVIL SERVICE EXAMS IS NOT A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT SUBJECT TO NEGOTIATION UNDER THE TAYLOR LAW (CT APP).
Slip and Fall On Ice While Wearing Stilts Not an Elevation-Related Event within Meaning of Labor Law 240 (1)
“Preamble” to Miranda Warnings Used In Queens County Undermined the Effectiveness of the Miranda Warnings—Defendants’ Statements Should Have Been Suppressed
Bear Stearns Complaint Stated a Cause of Action for Indemnification and Should Not Have Been Dismissed

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

FAMILY COURT ERRONEOUSLY DIRECTED SERVICE UPON MOTHER IN THIS MODIFICATION OF... HERE THE TOWN PASSED A LOCAL LAW REQUIRING THE CLOSURE OF A LANDFILL OWNED AND...