Tenant Didn't Prove Racial or Sexual Discrimination

LVT Number: 14769

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained to the State Division of Human Rights (DHR) that landlord discriminated against him on the basis of race and sex. After conducting an investigation, the DHR found no basis for the claim and dismissed the case. Tenant appealed and lost. First, tenant's appeal wasn't filed on time, since it was filed more than 60 days after the DHR issued its decision. Also, the DHR's decision had a rational basis.

(Decision submitted by James R. Marino of the Manhattan law firm of Kucker & Bruh, LLP, attorneys for the landlord.) Tenant complained to the State Division of Human Rights (DHR) that landlord discriminated against him on the basis of race and sex. After conducting an investigation, the DHR found no basis for the claim and dismissed the case. Tenant appealed and lost. First, tenant's appeal wasn't filed on time, since it was filed more than 60 days after the DHR issued its decision. Also, the DHR's decision had a rational basis. The DHR found that any racial or sexual remarks made to tenant by the building super were made in the heat of an argument and didn't constitute discrimination by landlord.

Tunne v. Mautner & Glick Real Estate Corp.: Index No. 403465/00 (Sup. Ct. NY 1/10/01; Lebedeff, J) [4-pg. doc.]

Downloads

403465-00.pdf184.68 KB