Shahinian v. Board of Higher Education

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shahinian v. Board of Higher Education

75 A.D.2d 809, 427 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11401

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

DecidedMay 5, 1980

StatusPublished

This text of 75 A.D.2d 809 (Shahinian v. Board of Higher 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

Shahinian v. Board of Higher Education, 75 A.D.2d 809, 427 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11401 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Proceeding pursuant to section 298 of the Executive Law to review an order of the State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated December 5, 1978, which affirmed a determination of the State Division of Human Rights, dated March 8, 1978, dismissing petitioner’s complaint for lack of probable cause. Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements. There is substantial evidence to sustain the division’s determination dismissing petitioner’s complaint. While the challenged retrenchment program may have resulted in a disproportionate reduction in the number of personnel who were female or Armenian, the record does not indicate there was any unlawful discriminatory intent under section 296 (subd 1, par [a]) of the Executive Law. Titone, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Martuscello, 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 December 5, 1978, which affirmed a determination of the State Division of Human Rights, dated March 8, 1978, dismissing petitioner’s complaint for lack of probable cause. Order confirmed and proceeding dismissed, without costs or disbursements. There is substantial evidence to sustain the division’s determination dismissing petitioner’s complaint. While the challenged retrenchment program may have resulted in a disproportionate reduction in the number of personnel who were female or Armenian, the record does not indicate there was any unlawful discriminatory intent under section 296 (subd 1, par [a]) of the Executive Law. Titone, J. P., Mangano, Rabin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 A.D.2d 809, 427 N.Y.S.2d 493, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shahinian-v-board-of-higher-education-nyappdiv-1980.