Opinion
November 20, 1967
In a proceeding by the State Commission for Human Rights pursuant to section 298 Exec. of the Executive Law to enforce an order of said commission dated September 23, 1966, respondents therein appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated December 22, 1966, which (1) modified the order of the commission and directed its enforcement as so modified and (2) denied said respondents' cross application to annul the order of the commission, except that they do not appeal from so much of the order of said court as modified the order of the commission. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. We agree with appellants that the commission's Finding No. 6 was not supported by substantial evidence and that its Finding No. 7 was sustained only to the extent that the representations therein referenced were made by Jean Knoll. The other findings, however, were supported by substantial evidence and the remedy selected by the commission, as modified at Special Term, bears a reasonable relationship to the discriminatory practices found to exist ( Matter of Holland v. Edwards, 307 N.Y. 38, 46). Beldock, P.J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.