From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Town of Huntington v. New York State Division of Human Rights

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 23, 1992
181 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)

Opinion

March 23, 1992

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, and the respondent New York State Division of Human Rights is prohibited from considering a complaint of racial discrimination brought by the respondent Charles Reed pursuant to Executive Law article 15.

The respondent Charles Reed was dismissed from his civil service position as a sign inspector for the Town for Huntington after a proceeding pursuant to Civil Service Law § 75. During that proceeding, Reed alleged that the charges of misconduct and incompetence were made against him because of racial discrimination. Both the Hearing Officer and ultimately the personnel director of the Town specifically rejected Reed's claims of discrimination. After the Hearing Officer made his decision, Reed brought a complaint before the respondent New York State Division of Human Rights (hereinafter SDHR) raising essentially the same allegations of racial discrimination.

We agree with the petitioner that Reed is collaterally estopped from litigating his claim of racial discrimination before the SDHR. Collateral estoppel can give conclusive effect to the quasi-judicial determinations of administrative agencies if there is an identity of issue which has necessarily been decided in the prior action and is decisive of the present action, and there was a full and fair opportunity to contest the decision now said to be controlling (see, Staatsburg Water Co. v Staatsburg Fire Dist., 72 N.Y.2d 147; Kaufman v Lilly Co., 65 N.Y.2d 449; Ryan v New York Tel. Co., 62 N.Y.2d 494). We find that Reed vigorously presented his claim of discrimination in the civil service proceeding, and that he had a full and fair opportunity to present his claim. Moreover, Reed's allegations of discrimination in the civil service proceeding were essentially the same that he intends to offer before the SDHR. Accordingly, the SDHR is precluded from continuing its investigation (cf., Board of Educ. v New York State Human Rights Appeal Bd., 106 A.D.2d 364). Balletta, J.P., O'Brien, Copertino and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Town of Huntington v. New York State Division of Human Rights

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 23, 1992
181 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
Case details for

Town of Huntington v. New York State Division of Human Rights

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the TOWN OF HUNTINGTON, Appellant, v. NEW YORK STATE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 23, 1992

Citations

181 A.D.2d 827 (N.Y. App. Div. 1992)
581 N.Y.S.2d 381

Citing Cases

Matter of Town v. N.Y. St. Div. of Human Rights

The Appellate Division reversed, granted the petition, prohibited the Division from considering Reed's…

Matter of Town of Huntington v. New York State

Decided February 23, 1993 Appeal from (2d Dept: 181 A.D.2d 827) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL GRANTED OR…