Brooklyn Union Gas Company, Respondent,
v.
New York State Human Rights Appeal Board et al., Appellants.
American Airlines, Inc., Respondent,
v.
State Human Rights Appeal Board et al., Appellants.
State Division of Human Rights, Respondent,
v.
Crouseirving Memorial Hospital, Appellant.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued October 18, 1976.
Decided December 20, 1976.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Ann Thacher Anderson and Beverly Gross, New York City, for New York State Division of Human Rights, appellant in the first above-entitled proceeding.
John E. Murphy and Harry G. Hill, Brooklyn, for respondent in the first above-entitled proceeding.
Rosalind S. Fink, Cecelia H. Goetz and Susan B. Lindenauer, New York City, for Special Committee on Women's Rights of the New York County Lawyers' Association, amicus curiae.
Ann Thacher Anderson and Beverly Gross, New York City, for State Division of Human Rights, appellant in the second above-entitled proceeding.
James B. McQuillan, New York City, respondent in the second above-entitled proceeding.
John F. Lawton, Syracuse, for appellant in the third above-entitled proceeding.
Ann Thacher Anderson and Beverly Gross, New York City, for respondent in the third above-entitled proceeding.
David L. Benetar, Eugene D. Ulterino and Stanley Schair, New York City, for New York Chamber, Associated Industries of New York State, Inc., and another, amici curiae.
Edward Silver, Morton M. Maneker, Sara S. Portnoy and Stephen E. Tisman, New York City, for American Telephone & Telegraph Company and others, amici curiae.
Susan C. Ross, Kathleen Willert Peratis, Melvin L. Wulf and Eve Cary, New York City, for American Civil Liberties Union and another, amici curiae.
Judges GABRIELLI, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur with Judge JONES; Chief Judge BREITEL dissents and votes to affirm in a separate opinion in which Judge JASEN concurs.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
JONES, J.
We hold that the provisions of subdivision 3 of section 205 of our State's Disability Benefits Law do not operate to shelter employment practices in the private sector that would otherwise be impermissibly discriminatory under our Human Rights Law. The imperative of the latter overrides the permissiveness of the former.
We have held that an employment...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting Sign on now to see your case. Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
Updated daily.
Uncompromising quality.
Complete, Accurate, Current.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full
text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the
full text of the citing case.
