Opinion
July 20, 1970
Proceeding by Nescott of East Islip, Inc., pursuant to section 298 Exec. of the Executive Law, to annul a determination of the State Human Rights Appeal Board dated January 26, 1970, which modified, and affirmed as modified, an order of the State Division of Human Rights made after a hearing and dated September 2, 1969, which latter order, as so modified, found petitioner in violation of the Human Rights Law (Executive Law, art. 15) and directed petitioner to pay $1,456 to the complainant, Mary Coleman, as damages for lost wages; and cross application by the State Division of Human Rights for an order enforcing its determination. Petition of Nescott of East Islip, Inc., granted, on the law, without costs; determination annulled; orders vacated; and cross application denied, without costs. In our opinion, the findings of the State Division of Human Rights, as affirmed by the Human Rights Appeal Board, were not supported by sufficient evidence on the record considered as a whole (Executive Law, § 298). The fact that the store manager advanced a false reason for discharging the complainant does not constitute sufficient evidence of discrimination to justify the drastic sanctions imposed by the division's order. There was no other evidence of racial or color discrimination on which a reasonable conclusion could be based (cf. Matter of Mid Vil. Realty v. New York State Comm. for Human Rights, 34 A.D.2d 794). It is also noted that petitioner has Negro employees in another store, although none in the store here in question. Christ, P.J., Rabin, Hopkins, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur.