# Otis v. Board of Higher Education

> Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · November 28, 1950 · 277 A.D.2d 1035

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6064652

## Case

- **Full name:** In the Matter of William B. Otis, against Board of Higher Education of the City of New York, Respondent In the Matter of Roger A. Johnson, against Board of Higher Education of the City of New York, Respondent In the Matter of Justin H. Moore, against Board of Higher Education of the City of New York, Respondent In the Matter of Martin Meyer, against Board of Higher Education of the City of New York
- **Court:** Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
- **Decided:** November 28, 1950
- **Citations:** 277 A.D.2d 1035
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 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/6064652

## Opinion text

Orders affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.; Glennon and Callahan, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse in the following memorandum: Under the plain language of the statute the petitioners herein would seem to be entitled to six annual increments to be added to the appointive salaries so long as the total of the increments and salary received does not exceed the maximum salary provided by the statute. The language of the statute being clear, no room is left for applying the rule of practical construction. Those petitioners who had received one or more annual increments before the statute was enacted are limited to the remaining annual increments not received before the statute went into effect.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6064652. Public record. Not legal advice.