Opinion

City of New York v. City Civil Service Commission

  • 60 N.Y.2d 436
  • 470 N.Y.S.2d 113
  • 458 N.E.2d 354
  • 1983 N.Y. LEXIS 3504
Court
New York Court of Appeals
Filed
Dec 1, 1983
Status
Published
Author
Simons
On the bench
Cooke, Kaye, Simons
Cited by
95 cases
Authority
More cited than 27.2%

recognizing that the authority of an agency to bring suit does not require “that in every instance there be express legislative authority”; rather, the capacity to sue may also be inferred as a “necessary implication from [the agency’s] power and responsibility,” provided that “there is no clear legislative intent negating review”

How later courts described this case

  • recognizing that the authority of an agency to bring suit does not require “that in every instance there be express legislative authority”; rather, the capacity to sue may also be inferred as a “necessary implication from [the agency’s] power and responsibility,” provided that “there is no clear legislative intent negating review”
  • holding that a city civil service commission has the inherent authority to seek injunctive or other incidental relief when a city agency violates the merit system law
  • holding that the Personnel Director “has both the policymaking authority and functional responsibility for civil service matters in New York City”
  • whether challenge is raised by private entity or "by a governmental officer or agency with policy-making authority and functional responsibility in the subject area sought to be reviewed, the factors to be applied in determining standing to seek review of an administrative decision are the same”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Simons, J.

(concurring). I concur in the result because I

agree with the majority that the city Personnel Director has implied authority to maintain this action and therefore comes within the rule stated in Matter of Flacke v Freshwater Wetlands Appeals Bd. ( 53 NY2d 537, 540 ). In my judgment, however, the rules of standing set forth in Matter of Dairylea Coop. v Walkley ( 38 NY2d 6 ) are inapplicable to intra-governmental disputes (Matter of Pooler v Public Serv. Comm., 58 AD2d 940 , affd 43 NY2d 750 ). Insofar as Matter of Bradford Cent. School Dist. v Ambach ( 56 NY2d 158 ) holds otherwise, that case involved a dispute between a local school board and a State agency, not two units within the same department of local government.

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.