From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Edinboro v. N.Y. St. Human Rights

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 18, 2001
289 A.D.2d 123 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

5648

December 18, 2001.

Determination of respondent Commissioner of the State Division of Human Rights, dated April 6, 2000, which dismissed petitioner's claims under the New York State Human Rights Law against respondent Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to this Court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County [Alice Schlesinger, J.], entered September 29, 2000), dismissed, without costs.

James E. Bayley For A Judgment, Etc., for petitioner.

Joseph C. O'Keefe, for respondents.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Ellerin, Rubin, JJ.


Contrary to respondent Metropolitan Life's contention, the petition was timely. Nonetheless, the petition should be dismissed since our review of the record discloses that the Commissioner's findings, that petitioner was not subjected to sexual harassment and that respondent met its burden to demonstrate non-discriminatory reasons for petitioner's termination, were supported by substantial evidence (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 181-182). There is no basis to disturb the administrative tribunal's determination rejecting petitioner's testimony respecting sexual comments by her co-workers (see,Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436, 443-444). The Commissioner's finding that respondent Metropolitan Life met its burden to demonstrate non-discriminatory reasons for petitioner's termination was supported by testimony and documentation establishing that petitioner was terminated for insubordination, inability to get along with her co-workers and lateness (see, Budzanoski v. Pfizer, Inc., 245 A.D.2d 72).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

In re Edinboro v. N.Y. St. Human Rights

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 18, 2001
289 A.D.2d 123 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

In re Edinboro v. N.Y. St. Human Rights

Case Details

Full title:IN RE APPLICATION OF C. CLAIRE EDINBORO, PETITIONER, v. NEW YORK STATE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Dec 18, 2001

Citations

289 A.D.2d 123 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
734 N.Y.S.2d 173

Citing Cases

Seemer v. New York State Div. of Human Rts.

HRA is a "necessary party" within the meaning of CPLR 1001 because were the court to enter judgment in…

Seemer v. New York State Div. of Human Rts.

At the outset, the court finds that this petition should be dismissed because Seemer has failed to name his…