David v. New York City Commission on Human Rights
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
*407HRC’s determination had a rational basis and was not arbitrary and capricious (see Matter of McFarland v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 241 AD2d 108, 111-112 [1998]). Notwithstanding petitioner’s concern with HRC’s alleged predisposition, the record establishes that HRC conducted a sufficient investigation, including interviewing over 20 witnesses, that was not “abbreviated or one sided” into her claims of discrimination on the basis of race, color, gender and sexual orientation (Matter of Levin v New York City Commn. on Human Rights, 12 AD3d 328, 329 [2004]). Nor is there evidence that…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- McFarland v. New York State Division of Human RightsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Levin v. New York City Commission on Human RightsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
3Cited by3 opinions
- Block v. GatlingAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Den Hollander v. City of New York Commission on Human RightsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Den Hollander v. City of New York Commission on Human RightsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014