Under 21 et al., Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Respondents-Appellants,
v.
City of New York et al., Appellants-Respondents
Salvation Army, Respondent,
v.
Edward I. Koch, as Mayor of The City of New York, et al., Appellants
Agudath Israel of America, Respondent,
v.
City of New York et al., Appellants
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
May 7, 1985
May 7, 1985
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Alfred Weinstein of counsel (Dennis deLeon, Michael S. Adler and Paul Rephen with him on the brief; Frederick A. O. Schwarz, Jr., Corporation Counsel, attorney), for defendants-appellants.
John P. Hale, P. C., for Under 21 and others, respondents-appellants.
Joseph Polizzotto of counsel (William J. Moss, Edward P. O'Keefe and Lindsay L. Wood with him on the brief; Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, attorneys), for Salvation Army, respondent.
David Zwiebel for Agudath Israel of America, plaintiff.
O. Peter Sherwood of counsel (Rosemarie Rhodes, Lawrence S. Kahn and Debra L. Raskin on the brief; Robert Abrams, Attorney-General, attorney), for State of New York, amicus curiae.
Thomas B. Stoddard of counsel (Thomas B. Stoddard and Madeline Kochen, attorneys), for New York Civil Liberties Union, amicus curiae.
David L. Benetar of counsel (Stanley Schair with him on the brief; Benetar, Isaacs, Bernstein & Schair, attorneys), for The New York Chamber of Commerce and Industry, amicus curiae.
Robert L. Becker and Rosaria Esperon for Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., amicus curiae.
Richard E. Feldman for Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., amicus curiae.
CARRO, J. P., and KASSAL, J., concur with ASCH, J.; BLOOM, J., dissents in an opinion.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
ASCH, J.
Three actions were brought challenging the validity of Executive Order No. 50 issued by New York City Mayor Edward I. Koch on April 25, 1980, which, inter alia, forbids those who secure contracts with New York City from refusing to hire people simply on the basis of "sexual orientation or affectional preference" even if they can perform the job in a satisfactory manner.
The legal issues...
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.
