Emil v. Dewey

Decided April 24, 1980

New York Court of Appeals · decided 1980-04-24

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“precludes the plaintiff from commencing an action in court based on the same incident,”

quoted by 3 later decisions, including Moodie v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 651 F. Supp. 1225 - Kirkland v. City of Peekskill

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1980-04-24

How this case has been cited

Cited by 87 later decisions — most recently February 2013 · most notably DeCintio v. Westchester County Medical Center (1987), Moodie v. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (1995)

12 federal appellate ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION OF THE COURT

¶2Memorandum.

¶3The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

¶4The 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.

¶5Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur in memorandum.

¶6Order affirmed.