Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
IN RE: Diane BALLARD, Petitioner-Respondent, v. HSBC BANK USA, Respondent-Petitioner, Edward A. Friedland, Acting Commissioner, New York State Division of Human Rights, Respondent.
Contrary to the contention of petitioner-respondent (petitioner), the determination of respondent, Acting Commissioner, New York State Division of Human Rights (SDHR), that her termination by respondent-petitioner HSBC Bank USA (HSBC) was not in retaliation for her initial complaint of discrimination is supported by substantial evidence (see 300 Gramatan Ave. Assoc. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176, 181-182, 408 N.Y.S.2d 54, 379 N.E.2d 1183). Petitioner continued to be employed by HSBC for more than one year after she filed her initial complaint, and her behavior on her final day of work provided a sufficient basis for her termination from employment (see generally Matter of Milonas v. Rosa, 217 A.D.2d 825, 825-828, 629 N.Y.S.2d 535, lv. denied 87 N.Y.2d 806, 641 N.Y.S.2d 597, 664 N.E.2d 508). Respondent also properly determined that, to the extent that petitioner asserted in her complaint that HSBC failed to promote her, that part of her complaint was untimely because it was not filed with SDHR within one year of the alleged discrimination (see Executive Law § 297[5] ). The alleged failure to promote is a single act of discrimination and does not fall within the continuing violation exception to the limitations period (see generally State Div. of Human Rights v. Burroughs Corp., 73 A.D.2d 801, 423 N.Y.S.2d 725, affd. 52 N.Y.2d 748, 436 N.Y.S.2d 276, 417 N.E.2d 570).
The award of $35,000 as compensatory damages for petitioner's mental anguish and humiliation was “reasonably related to the discriminatory conduct” and will not be disturbed (Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 78 N.Y.2d 207, 216-217, 573 N.Y.S.2d 49, 577 N.E.2d 40). Finally, HSBC failed to interpose a timely cross petition and thus may not seek affirmative relief in this proceeding (see generally Executive Law § 298; Matter of State Div. of Human Rights v. Fairway Apts. Corp., 39 A.D.2d 761, 332 N.Y.S.2d 474, affd. 33 N.Y.2d 754, 350 N.Y.S.2d 131, 304 N.E.2d 775).
It is hereby ORDERED that the determination be and the same hereby is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition and cross petition are dismissed.
MEMORANDUM:
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: July 06, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)