Opinion
June 6, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Edith Miller, J.).
The decision to disqualify for appointment was neither arbitrary and capricious nor unlawfully discriminatory. Given medical opinion that petitioner's particular condition placed him "most at risk", that the condition would affect his performance, as well as increase the likelihood that he would eventually become disabled, the determination had a rational basis ( see, Matter of Palozzolo v. Nadel, 83 A.D.2d 539, affd 55 N.Y.2d 984; Matter of State Div. of Human Rights [Granelle], 70 N.Y.2d 100). Therefore, there was no violation of Executive Law § 296, or of the Federal Rehabilitation Act ( 29 U.S.C. § 794).
Concur — Milonas, J.P., Rosenberger, Ross and Tom, JJ.