Opinion

Brown v. State Human Rights Appeal Board

  • 73 A.D.2d 606
  • 422 N.Y.S.2d 441
  • 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14404
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Dec 10, 1979
Status
Published
Cited by
6 cases
Authority
More cited than 88.0%

The opinion

Proceeding pursuant to section 298 of the Executive Law to review an order of the State Human Rights Appeal Board, dated May 30, 1979, which affirmed a determination of the New York State Division of Human Rights dismissing petitioners’ complaint upon a finding of no probable cause to believe that respondents Cragswold, Inc., and the members of the board of directors of Cragswold, Inc., had engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice relating to housing. Order confirmed, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding dismissed. Petitioners argue that the State Division of Human Rights failed to adequately investigate the allegations in their complaint. The regional director of the division office in which a complaint is filed is required to make a "prompt and fair investigation” of the allegations in the complaint (9 NYCRR 465.6 [a]). The method of investigation is left to the discretion of the regional director and may include written or oral inquiry (9 NYCRR 465.6 [b]). The complainants must be afforded an opportunity to rebut evidence submitted by or obtained from *607 the respondents before the complaint may be dismissed for no probable cause (9 NYCRR 465.6 [c]). These procedures were followed to the letter by the regional director. The allegations in petitioners’ complaint were reviewed and an investigative inquiry form containing detailed questions pertaining to these allegations was sent to the Cragswold respondents. The response contained specific facts sufficient to rebut petitioners’ allegations. Petitioners were then given an opportunity to read and rebut the evidence submitted by the Cragswold respondents. Accordingly, since the division acted reasonably and arrived at its decision after investigating the petitioners’ allegations and allowing them an opportunity to be heard, the determination should be upheld (see Matter of Cornwell v IBM Corp., 67 AD2d 1034 ). Damiani, J. P., O’Connor, Lazer and Rabin, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.