Skip to main content

ALEKSANDR LISENKOV VS. BOARD OF REVIEW, ETC. (BOARD OF REVIEW, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR)

NJSUPERCTAPPDIVFebruary 6, 2020No. A-3026-18T3

Case Details

Status
Unpublished
Procedural Posture
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Board of Review's decision to dismiss the claimant's unemployment benefits appeal as untimely was affirmed. The claimant failed to file his appeal within the statutory ten-day deadline and showed no good cause for the delay.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** Aleksandr Lisenkov was denied unemployment benefits and wanted to appeal that decision. However, he missed the deadline to file his appeal. In New Jersey, workers have only 10 days to appeal a denial of unemployment benefits. When Lisenkov finally did file his appeal, it was late. The state's Board of Review dismissed his appeal because it was filed after the deadline. Lisenkov then took the case to court, arguing that his late filing should be excused. **What the Court Decided** The court sided with the state agency and upheld the dismissal of Lisenkov's appeal. The court found that he failed to file his appeal within the required 10-day window and could not show a good reason for the delay that would justify excusing the missed deadline. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case highlights how strict timing deadlines can be in unemployment cases. Workers who are denied benefits must act quickly to preserve their right to appeal. Missing the 10-day deadline can permanently bar someone from challenging a denial, even if they believe the original decision was wrong. Workers should immediately calendar appeal deadlines and seek help if they're unsure about the process.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.