In the Matter of Helena Holland, Doing Business as "Holland Vocational Service", against Edward W. Edwards, as…

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division's order upholding the State Commission Against Discrimination's determination that Holland Vocational Service's application questions and oral inquiries constituted an unlawful employment practice under Executive Law §§ 296 and 297. The Court held that the Commission's findings were supported by substantial evidence, that the complainant was an aggrieved person, and that untimely objections are not reviewable. The Court also affirmed the Commission's broad remedial discretion. Justice Froessel, in a concurring opinion, agreed with the result but expressed reservations about certain remedial directives and noted that the name‑change question is not per se objectionable.