Opinion

McKinney v. McGoldrick

  • 243 A.D. 210
  • 276 N.Y.S. 593
  • 1935 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7033
Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Filed
Jan 15, 1935
Status
Published
Author
Untermyer
On the bench
Merrell, Untermyer
Cited by
7 cases

The opinion

Untermyer, J.

(concurring in result). I am unable to concur in the opinion of Mr. Justice Merrell because it decides that chapter 637 of the Laws of 1932 did not extend to the Transit Commission. It seems to me that the Transit Commission was included within the terms “ officers and employees performing or engaged in state or county business or functions, whose compensation, wholly or in part, is paid out of the city treasury.” I concur in the result, however, upon the ground that chapter 178 of the Laws of 1934, by transferring from the board of aldermen to the board of estimate and apportionment of the city of New York the power to fix salaries and at the same time omitting all reference to persons performing “ State ” functions, by implication repealed chapter 637 of the Laws of 1932. Thereafter only the salary of persons “ performing or engaged in city or county business or functions ” was subject to the control of the board of estimate and apportionment.

Order reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with fifty dollars costs. Settle order on notice.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.