Hamilton v. New York City Commission On Human Rights

199 A.D.2d 223, 606 N.Y.S.2d 166
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 30, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 199 A.D.2d 223 (Hamilton v. New York City Commission On 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
Hamilton v. New York City Commission On Human Rights, 199 A.D.2d 223, 606 N.Y.S.2d 166 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Diane S. Lebedeff, J.), entered August 20, 1992, which denied appellants’ petition to annul, and granted respondent’s cross-petition to enforce the June 28, 1991 order of the New York City Commission on Human Rights finding gender-based discrimination and awarding $28,356, plus interest, as damages, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 USC § 2000e [b]) is inapplicable because appellants employed only thirteen employees at all relevant times, the record reveals no error of law on the part of the Commission. The Commission’s finding, supported by substantial evidence, that appellants discriminated against complainant by treating her pregnancy-related disability in a less favorable manner than other disabilities (West Hempstead Union Free School Dist. v State Div. of Human Rights, 116 AD2d 642, 643) is consistent with well-settled law that requires an employer to grant maternity leave to the extent that it grants leaves for other disabilities (Brooklyn Union Gas Co. v New York State Human Rights Appeal Bd., 41 NY2d 84, 91).

Further, the award of $8,356 for lost wages is supported by [224]*224the evidence and the award of $20,000 for mental anguish is not " ' " 'shocking to one’s sense of fairness’ ” ’ ” (Matter of Barton v New York City Commn. on Human Rights, 151 AD2d 258, 259).

We have considered appellants’ other arguments and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

Related

State Division of Human Rights v. Dimi Lass Ltd.
232 A.D.2d 335 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Luciano v. Olsten Corp.
912 F. Supp. 663 (E.D. New York, 1996)
Liska v. Paramount Group, Inc.
213 A.D.2d 346 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
199 A.D.2d 223, 606 N.Y.S.2d 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-v-new-york-city-commission-on-human-rights-nyappdiv-1993.