Root v. New York State Human Rights Appeal Board

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Root v. New York State Human Rights Appeal Board

96 A.D.2d 1092, 466 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19745

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

DecidedSeptember 26, 1983

StatusPublished

This text of 96 A.D.2d 1092 (Root v. New York State Human Rights Appeal Board) 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

Root v. New York State Human Rights Appeal Board, 96 A.D.2d 1092, 466 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19745 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— Proceeding pursuant to section 298 of the Executive Law to review an order of the New York State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated April 15,1983, affirming an order of the New York State Division of Human Rights, dated September 30, 1981, which dismissed petitioner’s complaint for lack of probable cause. Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements. Petitioner failed to meet her “burden of establishing by substantial evidence that the sole reason” she was dismissed was because of her age and/or sex (see Matter of State Dio. of Human Rights o Bystricky, 36 AD2d 278, 280, affd 30 NY2d 322). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Thompson and Niehoff, 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 New York State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated April 15,1983, affirming an order of the New York State Division of Human Rights, dated September 30, 1981, which dismissed petitioner’s complaint for lack of probable cause. Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements. Petitioner failed to meet her “burden of establishing by substantial evidence that the sole reason” she was dismissed was because of her age and/or sex (see Matter of State Dio. of Human Rights o Bystricky, 36 AD2d 278, 280, affd 30 NY2d 322). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Thompson and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 A.D.2d 1092, 466 N.Y.S.2d 1017, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19745, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/root-v-new-york-state-human-rights-appeal-board-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack