Court Opinion

ID: 5845979
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-12 23:45:52.75815+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:43:55.586521
License: Public Domain

In an action to recover damages for “compensation and benefit increments”, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 21, 1980, which granted de*601fendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint. Order reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, motion denied, and complaint reinstated. Defendant’s time to answer is extended until 20 days after service upon it of a copy of the order to be made hereon, with notice of entry thereof. Subdivision 9 of section 297 of the Executive Law prohibits an aggrieved person from pursuing relief on a single discriminatory grievance in two different forums (Emil v Dewey, 49 NY2d 968; State Off. of Drug Abuse Seros, v State Human Rights Appeal Bd., 48 NY2d 276; Consolidated Edison Co. of N. Y. v State Human Rights Appeal Bd., 65 AD2d 546). This statute cannot be employed to bar an aggrieved person from maintaining a proceeding before the State Division of Human Rights based upon a discrimination complaint, while contemporaneously maintaining an action in the courts based on the alleged breach of an employment contract (see Matter of Richardson Employment Agency v New York State Div. of Human Rights, 40 AD2d 585). Therefore, we reverse. Mangano, J.P., Gibbons, Gulotta and O’Connor, JJ., concur.