Stern v. New York City Commission on Human Rights

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stern v. New York City Commission on Human Rights

38 A.D.3d 302, 830 N.Y.S.2d 655

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

DecidedMarch 13, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 38 A.D.3d 302 (Stern 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

Stern v. New York City Commission on Human Rights, 38 A.D.3d 302, 830 N.Y.S.2d 655 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.), entered January 6, 2006, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding brought to set aside a determination of the Human Rights Commission, dated July 1, 2005, finding that there was no probable cause for petitioner’s complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It is within the discretion of the respondent to decide how to conduct its investigations (see Matter of Cornelius v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 286 AD2d 329 [2001]), and we find that it conducted a sufficient investigation and provided petitioner with a full and fair opportunity to present his claim. Petitioner nonetheless failed to set forth evidence to support a finding of probable cause for his complaint alleging discrimination by reason of his sexual orientation. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the Department of Finance and its former chief administrative law judge were not necessary parties to this proceeding challenging respondent Commission’s finding of no probable cause. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Buckley, Sweeny and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.), entered January 6, 2006, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding brought to set aside a determination of the Human Rights Commission, dated July 1, 2005, finding that there was no probable cause for petitioner’s complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It is within the discretion of the respondent to decide how to conduct its investigations (see Matter of Cornelius v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 286 AD2d 329 [2001]), and we find that it conducted a sufficient investigation and provided petitioner with a full and fair opportunity to present his claim. Petitioner nonetheless failed to set forth evidence to support a finding of probable cause for his complaint alleging discrimination by reason of his sexual orientation. Contrary to petitioner’s contention, the Department of Finance and its former chief administrative law judge were not necessary parties to this proceeding challenging respondent Commission’s finding of no probable cause. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Marlow, Buckley, Sweeny and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.D.3d 302, 830 N.Y.S.2d 655, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stern-v-new-york-city-commission-on-human-rights-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack