# Slattery v. Board of Estimate & Apportionment

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · February 14, 1936 · 246 A.D. 296

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5341809

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of the Application of Elizabeth V. B. Slattery, for a Certiorari Order against The Board of Estimate and Apportionment of the City of New York
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** February 14, 1936
- **Citations:** 246 A.D. 296; 285 N.Y.S. 768; 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9492
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Townley
- **Judges:** Glennon, Townley
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5341809

## Opinion text

Townley, J. (dissenting).
I dissent on the following grounds: (1) The New York city employees’ retirement system is a separate corporation and is not bound by the prior adjudication; (2) the board of estimate and apportionment of the city of New York as *301 respondent in this action is a party answering in the capacity of trustees of a separate corporation and its funds and not as an employer under the Workmen’s Compensation Law; (3) the evidence presented to the respondent justified the finding that Colonel Slattery did not meet his death by accident; and (4) the funds out of which the pension is to be paid are funds of the New York city employees’ retirement system (Greater N. Y. Charter, § 1707; Report on the Pension Funds of City of New York, vol. 3, pp. 15, 16).
The order of certiorari should be dismissed and the determination of the board of estimate and apportionment of the city of New York confirmed.
Untermyer, J., concurs.
Order of certiorari sustained, the determination of the respondent annulled, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements to the petitioner, and the respondent directed to accept as final and conclusive the findings of the State Industrial Board, as affirmed by the Appellate Division, Third Department, and award a pension to the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of section 1718 of the charter.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/5341809. Public record. Not legal advice.