From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Kushnir v. New York State Division

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 12, 1985
114 A.D.2d 898 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

November 12, 1985


The determination of the New York State Division of Human Rights that petitioner was not denied a promotion because of her religion or creed was supported by substantial evidence (see, Executive Law § 298; 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176; cf. State Div. of Human Rights v Kilian Mfg. Corp., 35 N.Y.2d 201, appeal dismissed 420 U.S. 915). Additionally, petitioner was given a full and fair opportunity to present evidence on her behalf and to rebut the evidence presented by the respondent employer but she failed to produce any supportive evidence. Furthermore, it is within the discretion of the Division of Human Rights to decide the method or methods to be employed in investigating complaints of discrimination; thus there was no need to hold a conference in this case (see, Matter of Shepard v McCall, 112 A.D.2d 239; Soellner v State Div. of Human Rights, 100 A.D.2d 876, 877; Brown v State Human Rights Appeal Bd., 73 A.D.2d 606, 607). Mollen, P.J., Lazer, Weinstein and Rubin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of Kushnir v. New York State Division

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 12, 1985
114 A.D.2d 898 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

Matter of Kushnir v. New York State Division

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of CAROL KUSHNIR, Petitioner, v. NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF…

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

Date published: Nov 12, 1985

Citations

114 A.D.2d 898 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

Watterson v. for a Judgement Pursuant to the Provisions of Article 78 of the N.Y. Civil Practice Law

Although DHR did not personally interview the petitioner, the method in which the DHR conducts an…

Matter of Patel v. State Div. of Human Rights

of Human Rights that the petitioner was not the victim of unlawful discrimination had a rational basis, was…