Legal Opinion

Silbert v. Jackson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 6, 1996PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

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 eventu*199ally become disabled, the determination had a rational basis (see, Matter of Palozzolo v Nadel, 83 AD2d 539, affd 55 NY2d 984; Matter of State Div. of Human Rights [Granelle], 70 NY2d 100). Therefore, there was no violation of Executive Law § 296, or of the Federal Rehabilitation Act (29 USC §…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of New York v. State Division of Human RightsNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
  2. Palozzolo v. NadelAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  3. MATTER OF PALOZZOLO v. NadelNew York Court of Appeals · 1982

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Tsang v. SafirAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API