Jerome v. Cornell University

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jerome v. Cornell University

109 A.D.2d 799, 487 N.Y.S.2d 538, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47292

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

DecidedMarch 11, 1985

StatusPublished

This text of 109 A.D.2d 799 (Jerome v. Cornell University) 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

Jerome v. Cornell University, 109 A.D.2d 799, 487 N.Y.S.2d 538, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47292 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Proceeding pursuant to Executive Law § 298 to review an order of the State Division of Human Rights, dated April 29, 1983, which (1) determined that there was no probable cause to believe that the respondent employer engaged in unlawful discriminatory practices resulting in the termination of petitioner’s employment, and (2) dismissed petitioner’s complaint.

Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

We have reviewed the record and conclude that the determination of the State Division of Human Rights was supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176). There is nothing to suggest that the respondent terminated petitioner from his position because of unlawful discriminatory practices. Accordingly, the proceeding is dismissed. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

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

— Proceeding pursuant to Executive Law § 298 to review an order of the State Division of Human Rights, dated April 29, 1983, which (1) determined that there was no probable cause to believe that the respondent employer engaged in unlawful discriminatory practices resulting in the termination of petitioner’s employment, and (2) dismissed petitioner’s complaint.

Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements.

We have reviewed the record and conclude that the determination of the State Division of Human Rights was supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176). There is nothing to suggest that the respondent terminated petitioner from his position because of unlawful discriminatory practices. Accordingly, the proceeding is dismissed. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Bracken and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A.D.2d 799, 487 N.Y.S.2d 538, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47292, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jerome-v-cornell-university-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack