Case Name: Arthur D. Emil, Appellant, v. Thomas E. Dewey, Jr., et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1980-04-24
Citations: 49 N.Y.2d 968
Docket Number: 
Parties: Arthur D. Emil, Appellant, v Thomas E. Dewey, Jr., et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 49
Pages: 968–969

Head Matter:
Arthur D. Emil, Appellant, v Thomas E. Dewey, Jr., et al., Respondents.
Argued March 24, 1980;
decided April 24, 1980
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Floyd Abrams and Peter N. Wang for appellant.
Leon Brickman for 79 East 79th Street Corporation, respondent.
Paul B. Marrow for Thomas E. Dewey, Jr., and others, respondents.
Ann Thacher Anderson and Alan J. Saks for State Division of Human Rights, amicus curiae.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The complaint should be dismissed pursuant to subdivision 9 of section 297 of the Executive Law. The record indicates, and it is conceded, that prior to commencing this action the plaintiff had filed a complaint with the State Division of Human Rights. Although the plaintiff withdrew that complaint prior to any determination by the division, there is no showing this was done for administrative convenience. Under these circumstances the statute (Executive Law, § 297, subd 9) precludes the plaintiff from commencing an action in court based on the same incident.
Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed.