Opinion
09-29-2017
In the Matter of Basil SZLAPAK, Petitioner–Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS and Ford Motor Company, Respondents–Respondents.
Law Office of Lindy Korn PLLC, Buffalo (Lindy Korn of Counsel), for petitioner-appellant. Kienbaum Opperwall Hardy & Pelton, P.L.C., Birmingham, Michigan (Eric J. Pelton, of the Michigan Bar, Admitted Pro Hac Vice, of Counsel), for respondent-respondent Ford Motor Company.
Law Office of Lindy Korn PLLC, Buffalo (Lindy Korn of Counsel), for petitioner-appellant.
Kienbaum Opperwall Hardy & Pelton, P.L.C., Birmingham, Michigan (Eric J. Pelton, of the Michigan Bar, Admitted Pro Hac Vice, of Counsel), for respondent-respondent Ford Motor Company.
MEMORANDUM:
Petitioner commenced this proceeding pursuant to Executive Law § 298 challenging the determination of respondent New York State Division of Human Rights (SDHR), which dismissed, after an investigation, petitioner's employment discrimination complaint against respondent Ford Motor Company (Ford). SDHR determined that there was no probable cause to believe that Ford engaged in an unlawful discriminatory practice against petitioner. Supreme Court denied the relief sought by petitioner, thereby upholding SDHR's determination, and we affirm.
We conclude that SDHR conducted a proper investigation and afforded petitioner a full and fair opportunity to present evidence on his behalf and to rebut the evidence presented by Ford (see Matter of
Witkowich v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 56 A.D.3d 1170, 1170, 866 N.Y.S.2d 907, lv. denied 12 N.Y.3d 702, 876 N.Y.S.2d 349, 904 N.E.2d 504 ), and we further conclude that the determination "is supported by a rational basis and is not arbitrary or capricious" ( Matter of Majchrzak v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 151 A.D.3d 1856, 1857, 57 N.Y.S.3d 606 ; see Matter of Napierala v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 140 A.D.3d 1746, 1747, 32 N.Y.S.3d 797 ; see also Matter of McDonald v. New York State Div. of Human Rights, 147 A.D.3d 1482, 1483, 47 N.Y.S.3d 194 ).
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
CARNI, J.P., LINDLEY, NEMOYER, CURRAN, and TROUTMAN, JJ., concur.