New York State Division of Human Rights Public Hearings


Videoconference Public Hearings
In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR) will be holding public hearings via a videoconference platform. Anyone who wishes to attend a public hearing, including members of the public, press, and other non-participating observers ("attendees") should email Opens in a new window[email protected]. Attendees will be able to see and/or hear the public hearing in the same manner as the participants and will have a similar experience to sitting in a hearing room. Please note that you must email your intent to attend a hearing, to the email above, at least one business day in advance of the start of the hearing.

IMPORTANT: Any recording of a Division proceeding held by video or teleconference, including “screen-shots” or other audio or visual copying of a hearing, is absolutely prohibited.

Technical Support: The Division will not provide technical support for participants or attendees. Please contact your local IT support, and you may let us know if you are having technical difficulties by email at Opens in a new window[email protected].

Public Hearings Schedule

October 2020 Schedule, Updated: October 2, 2020

10/5/20 - 10/6/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
Celia Clancy v Park Line Asphalt Maintenance Inc.
Administrative Law Judge: Robert M. Vespoli

Rina Sencion; Gavina Sencion Agramonte v New York City Housing Authority; Kraus Management Inc.
Administrative Law Judge: Alexander Linzer

10/7/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
Troy T. Wilbert v Novelis Corporation; Bryan Coe
Administrative Law Judge: Edward Luban

10/7/20 - 10/8/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
Carolyn Giribaldi v New York State Dept. of Corrections
Administrative Law Judge: Thomas S. Protano

Ronald Dean Miller v City of New York, Department of Correction
Administrative Law Judge: Alexander Linzer

10/14/20 - 10/15/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
Blake Battle, Jr. v Related Management Company, L.P.
Administrative Law: Thomas S. Protano

Kellene Scinta v Accent Stripe, Inc.; Gerald Buchheit; Brandon Hill
Administrative Law: Martin Erazo, Jr.

Gregory S. Friedman v Bay Shore Union Free School District; Paul Dougherty
Administrative Law: Robert M. Vespoli

Dervona E. Hunter v Old Navy, div. of Gap, Inc.
Administrative Law: Margaret A. Jackson

Mattie Bourque v JOLIS Boathouse Inc., d/b/a Bluewater Grill
Administrative Law: Edward Luban

Safet Begic v Utica Bread LLC
Administrative Law: Michael T. Groben

10/19/20 - 10/20/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
Diana Livingston Fields v Community Medical and Dental Care, Inc.
Administrative Law: Alexander Linzer

Thomas R. Willard v ROC Hard Entertainment, LLC d/b/a Comedy @ The Carlson
Administrative Law: Michael T. Groben

Ann Vorburger v Jewish Community Center of Greater Buffalo, Inc.; Richard Zakalik; Patricia Simonson
Administrative Law: Martin Erazo, Jr.

10/21/20 - 10/22/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
Miguelina Baez v Morningside Heights Housing Corporation; Vincent Montalvo
Administrative Law: Alexander Linzer

Jesse C. Lewis, Jr. v Accountable Healthcare Staffing, Inc.
Administrative Law: Martin Erazo, Jr.

Holly Mousseau v Red House Restaurant; Miss. Joy, Inc. d/b/a Red House Restaurant; Robert Pollock; Robert Dayan
Administrative Law: Thomas S. Protano

Malikah Z. Shaheed v St. Elizabeth Medical Center
Administrative Law: Michael T. Groben

Victor Bisa v Glen Cove Hospital; Northwell Health, Inc.
Administrative Law: Margaret A. Jackson

10/26/20 - 10/27/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
New York State, Division of Human Rights v Outerwall Inc.; Cardpool, Inc.; Coinstar, LLC; Coinstar, Inc.
Administrative Law: Alexander Linzer

Crystal Barton v Buffalo Public Schools; Kriner Cash; Nathaniel Kuzma, Esq.
Administrative Law: Martin Erazo, Jr.

Gregory Flagg v Global Administrative Services, LLC d/b/a All Island Taxi; Mineola Automotive Inc.; Hempstead Leasing & Sales Inc.
Administrative Law: Robert M. Vespoli

Kimberly Eileen Ronan v Stacy K. Floral, Inc.; Stacy K. Ercan
Administrative Law: Edward Luban

Milagros Fiore-MacMonigle v Freeport Public School District
Administrative Law: Margaret A. Jackson

10/28/20 - 10/29/20, 9:30 AM to 5 PM
Panthong Wangperawong v Vody LLC
Administrative Law: Alexander Linzer

Jacklyn Lisi v New York State Unified Court System, Office of Court Administration
Administrative Law: Robert M. Vespoli

Amr Swid v New York Institute of Technology
Administrative Law: Margaret A. Jackson

What is a Public Hearing?
DHR investigates, prosecutes, and adjudicates complaints of unlawful discrimination. If a DHR investigation determined that there is probable cause to believe that unlawful discrimination may have occurred, the complaint will move forward to our public hearing process. A public hearing, pursuant to the Human Rights Law, is a trial-like proceeding at which relevant evidence is placed in the hearing record. It is a hearing de novo, which means that the Commissioner’s final decision on the case is based solely on the content of the hearing record. The public hearing is presided over by an Administrative Law Judge, and a verbatim transcript is made of the proceedings. The hearing may last one or more days, not always consecutive. Parties are notified of all hearing sessions in advance, and the case may be adjourned to a later date only for good cause. At the conclusion of the hearing sessions, a proposed Order is prepared by the Administrative Law Judge and is sent to the parties for comment.

What Occurs After the Public Hearing?
A final Order is issued by the Commissioner. The Commissioner either dismisses the complaint or finds discrimination. If discrimination is found, Respondent will be ordered to cease and desist and take appropriate action, such as reinstatement, training of staff, or provision of reasonable accommodation of disability. The Division may award money damages to Complainant including back pay and compensatory damages for mental pain and suffering, attorney’s fees, and civil fines and penalties. A Commissioner’s Order may be appealed by either party to the State Supreme Court within 60 days. Orders after hearing are transferred by the lower court to the Appellate Division for review.