From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

New Y. St. Div. of Human v. Filtration Prod

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1993
198 A.D.2d 760 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

November 19, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Hayes, J.

Present — Denman, P.J., Green, Balio, Fallon and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court had jurisdiction over the State Division of Human Rights (SDHR), a necessary party. SDHR's "Response to the Petition", stating that it was submitting on the record and raising no jurisdictional objections, indicated SDHR's intention to submit to the court's jurisdiction and conferred in personam jurisdiction on the court (see, Rubino v City of New York, 145 A.D.2d 285, 288; McLaughlin, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C320:2, at 492; Siegel, N Y Prac § 112, at 177-178 [2d ed]).

The petition was properly dismissed on the merits. Supreme Court properly concluded that the investigation conducted by SDHR was sufficient, that petitioner had adequate opportunity to present his contentions and that the finding of no probable cause had a rational basis in the record (see, State Div. of Human Rights v Hamilton Coll., 113 A.D.2d 1006; State Div. of Human Rights v Wiesner, 112 A.D.2d 786).


Summaries of

New Y. St. Div. of Human v. Filtration Prod

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 19, 1993
198 A.D.2d 760 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

New Y. St. Div. of Human v. Filtration Prod

Case Details

Full title:NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS, on Complaint of JOHN F. ELKO…

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

Date published: Nov 19, 1993

Citations

198 A.D.2d 760 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
605 N.Y.S.2d 995