Alecsandrescu v. Board of Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alecsandrescu v. Board of Education

63 A.D.2d 955, 405 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12000

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 5, 1978

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 63 A.D.2d 955 (Alecsandrescu v. Board of Education) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alecsandrescu v. Board of Education, 63 A.D.2d 955, 405 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12000 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to section 298 of the Executive Law to review an order of the State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated January 6, 1978, which affirmed an order of the State Division of Human Rights, dated May 16, 1977, which, after a hearing, dismissed petitioner’s complaint alleging unlawful and discriminatory termination of his employment. Proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as untimely, for failure to institute the proceeding within 30 days after service of the order of the Human Rights Appeal Board, as required by section 298 of the Executive Law. Were we to have considered this proceeding on its merits, we would have dismissed it, since petitioner failed to make out a prima facie case of discrimination, based upon substantial evidence (see Matter of Winston v Board of Coop. Educational Servs., 63 AD2d 652). Martuscello, J. P., Shapiro, Margett and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Proceeding pursuant to section 298 of the Executive Law to review an order of the State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated January 6, 1978, which affirmed an order of the State Division of Human Rights, dated May 16, 1977, which, after a hearing, dismissed petitioner’s complaint alleging unlawful and discriminatory termination of his employment. Proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as untimely, for failure to institute the proceeding within 30 days after service of the order of the Human Rights Appeal Board, as required by section 298 of the Executive Law. Were we to have considered this proceeding on its merits, we would have dismissed it, since petitioner failed to make out a prima facie case of discrimination, based upon substantial evidence (see Matter of Winston v Board of Coop. Educational Servs., 63 AD2d 652). Martuscello, J. P., Shapiro, Margett and Cohalan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.2d 955, 405 N.Y.S.2d 490, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12000, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alecsandrescu-v-board-of-education-nyappdiv-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack