Majority
“The determination of the State Commissioner of Human Rights must be confirmed if it is supported by substantial evidence” (Matter of Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y. v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 77 NY2d 411 , 417 [1991] [citation omitted]; see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d 176 , 179-180 [1978]). Substantial evidence “means such relevant proof as a reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion or ultimate fact” (300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v State Div. of Human Rights, 45 NY2d at 179-180 ). Here, the conclusion of the Commissioner of the New York State Division of Human Rights (hereinafter the Commissioner) that the respondent Greenman-Pedersen, Inc. (hereinafter GP), did not discriminate against the petitioner on the basis of his age is supported by substantial evidence. While the petitioner established a prima facie case of age discrimination, GP credibly provided legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for terminating the petitioner’s employment, and the petitioner failed to show that GP’s proffered reasons constituted a pretext for discrimination (see Stephenson v Hotel Empls. & Rest. Empls. Union Local 100 of AFL-CIO, 6 NY3d 265 , 271 [2006]; Matter of McDonald v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 77 AD3d 668 [2010]; Matter of Sauer v Donaldson, 49 AD3d 656 , 656-657 [2008]). Accordingly, the Commissioner’s determination must be confirmed. Skelos, J.E, Dickerson, Leventhal and Lott, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. New York State Division of Human Rights 77 NY2d 411 at 417 p. 705
- 300 Gramatan Avenue Associates v. State Division of Human Rights 45 NY2d 176 at 179-180 p. 705
- Stephenson v. Hotel Employees & Restaurant Employees Union Local 100 of AFL-CIO 6 NY3d 265 at 271 p. 705
- Sauer v. Donaldson 49 AD3d 656 at 656-657 p. 705