E. Landau Industries, Inc. v. New York State Division of Human Rights

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

E. Landau Industries, Inc. v. New York State Division of Human Rights

42 A.D.2d 728, 346 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3826

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

DecidedJuly 9, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 42 A.D.2d 728 (E. Landau Industries, Inc. v. New York State Division of Human Rights) 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

E. Landau Industries, Inc. v. New York State Division of Human Rights, 42 A.D.2d 728, 346 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3826 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding under section 298 of the Executive Law to review an order of the State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated May IT, 1972, which affirmed an order of the State Division of Human Rights, dated February 11, 1971, inter alla finding petitioner guilty of discriminating in the rental of available housing'accommodations. Application of petitioner granted to the extent that the order of the Human Rights Appeal Board is modified, on the law, -by striking from its decretal paragraph the words “ in all respects ” and adding thereto, immediately after the provision that the order of the Division is affirmed, the following: “ except that the following are stricken from the third decretal paragraph of the order of the State Division of Human Rights: ‘and its designee the Urban League of Westchester, 2 Grañd Street, White Plains, New York’ (in subdivision ‘a’) and ‘the number of referrals to the Urban League of Westchester, the names and racial identities of applicants referred by the Urban League of Westchester’’ (in subdivision ‘c’).” As so modified, said order of the Human Rights Appeal Board is confirmed, without costs (Kaval Constr. Corp. v. State Dip. of Human Bights, 39 A D 2d 347, 351). Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Gulotta, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

Proceeding under section 298 of the Executive Law to review an order of the State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated May IT, 1972, which affirmed an order of the State Division of Human Rights, dated February 11, 1971, inter alla finding petitioner guilty of discriminating in the rental of available housing'accommodations. Application of petitioner granted to the extent that the order of the Human Rights Appeal Board is modified, on the law, -by striking from its decretal paragraph the words “ in all respects ” and adding thereto, immediately after the provision that the order of the Division is affirmed, the following: “ except that the following are stricken from the third decretal paragraph of the order of the State Division of Human Rights: ‘and its designee the Urban League of Westchester, 2 Grañd Street, White Plains, New York’ (in subdivision ‘a’) and ‘the number of referrals to the Urban League of Westchester, the names and racial identities of applicants referred by the Urban League of Westchester’’ (in subdivision ‘c’).” As so modified, said order of the Human Rights Appeal Board is confirmed, without costs (Kaval Constr. Corp. v. State Dip. of Human Bights, 39 A D 2d 347, 351). Martuscello, Acting P. J., Latham, Gulotta, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 A.D.2d 728, 346 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-landau-industries-inc-v-new-york-state-division-of-human-rights-nyappdiv-1973.