State Division of Human Rights on Complaint of Noble v. University of Rochester
| Citation | 53 A.D.2d 1020,386 N.Y.S.2d 147 |
| Decision Date | 12 July 1976 |
| Parties | , 20 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 525, 12 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 11,133 STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS on Complaint of Barbara NOBLE, Respondent, v. UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER and Strong Memorial Hospital, Appellants. |
Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle, John McCrory, Rochester, for appellants.
Emmelyn Logan-Baldwin, Rochester, for respondent.
Before MOULE, J.P., and CARDAMONE, SIMONS, MAHONEY and DILLON, JJ.
Appellants appeal from an order of Special Term which granted complainant's motion to enforce two subpoenas duces tecum issued by the private attorney of complainant Noble and which determined that the complaint, insofar as it charged the preferment of Mr. Hill over complainant, was not barred by the one-year period of limitation (Executive Law, § 297(5)).
Complainant Noble is a perfusionist at Strong Memorial Hospital. She alleges that appellants unlawfully discriminated against her because of her sex by appointing one Aaron Hill to a position which she sought and for which she was qualified, that of Chief Perfusionist. Mr. Hill's appointment was effective January 1, 1974. The complaint filed with the State Division of Human Rights on March 3, 1975 charged that appellants had unlawfully preferred Mr. Hill and had engaged in acts of discrimination towards women employees generally. The Division has not made a finding of probable cause and the matter is still in the investigative stage.
The subpoenas are quashed. A private attorney may not issue a subpoena duces tecum during the investigatory stage of discrimination proceedings.
There is no statutory provision in the Executive Law for the issuance of subpoenas by private attorneys, although the statute provides that the Division may issue a subpoena at 'any stage of any investigation or proceeding before it' and may make rules with respect thereto (Executive Law § 295(7)). The Division rules permit private attorneys representing complainants to issue subpoenas as provided in the CPLR (9 NYCRR 465.10). In turn, CPLR 2302 provides that an attorney may issue subpoenas in administrative proceedings. This power to issue subpoenas, however, was designed to make evidence available at a hearing on the merits. Before a determination of probable cause, the complainant may be represented by an attorney but the matter is to be investigated by the State Division. Thus, the statute provides for various preliminary procedures designed to promote amicable settlements (see Executive Law, § 297) and for the dismissal of a complaint 'in the unreviewable discretion' of the Division if it finds that the complaint lacks substance. If the Division requires preliminary information obtainable by subpoena, the statute provides it with that authority, but before the hearing...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
U.S. Power Squadrons v. State Human Rights Appeal Bd.
... ... Supreme Court, Appellate Division, ... Second Department ... Dec. 31, 1981 ... of Human Rights v. University of Rochester, 53 A.D.2d 1020, 386 N.Y.S.2d 147; Matter of ... of the Human Rights Law by changes made after a complaint is filed", but petitioners contend that their rights must ... ...
-
NYS Nat'l Org. Women v. Pataki
...may directly subpoena parties and witnesses, see id. at § 465.14(2)(c). See also State Div. of Human Rights v. Univ. of Rochester, 386 N.Y.S.2d 147, 148 (App. Div. 4th Dep't 1976) ("This power to issue subpoenas... was designed to make evidence available at a hearing on the merits. Before a......
-
State Div. of Human Rights on Complaint of Mossler v. Westmoreland Cent. School Dist.
... ... 56 A.D.2d 205, 19 Fair Empl.Prac.Cas. (BNA) 666 ... STATE DIVISION OF HUMAN RIGHTS on the complaint of Rita ... MOSSLER, Respondent, ... of Human Rights v. University of Rochester, 53 A.D.2d 1020, 386 N.Y.S.2d 147; Matter of Queensborough ... ...
-
Patrowich v. Chemical Bank
... ... Supreme Court, Appellate Division, ... First Department ... Jan. 12, 1984 ... action, the first six based on Federal and State [98 A.D.2d 320] anti-discrimination statutes and ... the New York State Executive Law [the State Human Rights Law] ) ... The second ... or no reason, and dismissing the entire complaint as against defendant Corney, one of plaintiff's ... Princeton University Board of Trustees, 77 N.J. 55, 389 A.2d 465) ... University of Rochester, 53 A.D.2d 1020, 386 N.Y.S.2d 147) and the ... ...