MATTER OF QUEENSBOROUGH CMTY. COLL. OF THE CITY UNIV. OF NEW YORK v. State Human Rights Appeal Bd.
Cases that cite this one
40 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Matter of Dourdounas v. City of New York (N.Y. 2025)
- Mundy v. Nassau County Civil Service Commission (N.Y. 1978)
- Matter of Dourdounas v. City of New York (N.Y. 2025)
- Morehead v. Lind (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1985)
- Matter of Ferrara v. New York State Div. of Human Rights (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- Dykstra v. Wyeth Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (2d Cir. 2012)
- Haas v. Lockheed Martin Corp. (Md. 2007)
- Edmead v. McGuire (N.Y. 1986)
- Charles D. REICH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DOW BADISCHE COMPANY and Dow Chemical Company, Defendants-Appellees (2d Cir. 1978)
- Matter of Walshe v. New York State Unified Ct. Sys. Off. of Ct. Admin. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
- Matter of Dourdounas v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Fair Housing Justice Center, Inc. v. JDS Development LLC (District Court, S.D. New York 2020)
- Donoso v. New York Univ. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- Matter of Lozada v. Elmont Hook & Ladder Co. No. 1 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
- Naval v. Herbert H. Lehman College (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Bargstedt v. Cornell University (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Mitchell v. Nassau Community College (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1999)
- Roufaiel v. Ithaca College (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1997)
- GFI-Genfare v. New York City Transit Authority (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1992)
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. New York State Division of Human Rights (N.Y. 1991)
- Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. New York State Division of Human Rights (N.Y. 1989)
- West 90th Owners Corp. v. Schlechter (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1988)
- Guirdanella v. New York State Division of Housing & Community Renewal (New York Supreme Court 1988)
- Vasbinder v. Hartnett (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1987)
- National Life Insurance v. Frank B. Hall & Co. (N.Y. 1986)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
In the Matter of Queensborough Community College of the City University of New York et al., Respondents,
v.
State Human Rights Appeal Board et al., Respondents, and Ethne E. K. Marenco, Appellant.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
Everett E. Lewis for appellant.
W. Bernard Richland, Corporation Counsel (Mary P. Bass and L. Kevin Sheridan of counsel), for petitioners-respondents.
Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in memorandum.
MEMORANDUM.
Order affirmed, with costs.
The applicable statute provides that: "Any complaint filed pursuant to this section must be so filed within one year after the alleged unlawful discriminatory practice" (Executive Law, § 297, subd 5). The alleged discriminatory practice was the manifested decision not to reappoint complainant. Hence, there is no basis for reasoning that the limitation did not start to run until complainant had completed her current term of employment. The act of giving complainant notice that she would not be reappointed gave rise immediately to a "cause of action", as the Appellate Division observed, and therefore started the running of the limitation period. The analogy to Statutes of Limitation in general civil practice would lead to the same conclusion (CPLR 203, subd [a]; 1 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Prac, par 203.01). Nor is the limitation tolled by the invocation of grievance procedure which is merely an alternative remedy. In Federal practice under the Federal statutes a similar conclusion was reached by the Supreme Court (Electrical Workers v Robbins & Meyers, 429 US 229, 236-240).
Order affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.