Hurlbut v. Cromwell

New York Supreme Court

Hurlbut v. Cromwell

147 N.Y.S. 1035

DecidedOctober 14, 1912

StatusPublished

This text of 147 N.Y.S. 1035 (Hurlbut v. Cromwell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hurlbut v. Cromwell, 147 N.Y.S. 1035 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

GREENBAUM, J.

The rights of an honorably discharged veteran of the volunteer navy of the United States during the Spanish War are analogous to those of a volunteer fireman and arise under section 22 of the Civil Service Law and not section 21, which applies to honor[1036]*1036ably discharged soldiers, sailors, or marines in the late Civil War. I am therefore constrained to hold, following Cottam v. City of N. Y., 74 Misc. Rep. 67, 131 N. Y. Supp. 617, that the petitioner may not properly claim a preference over other draftsmen in the borough president’s department by requiring their discharge because of lack of funds, so that he may thereby be retained in his position. The procedure that may be pursued by petitioner under section 22 of the Civil Service Law is outlined in Matter of Breckenridge, 160 N. Y. 103, 54 N. E. 670. The cases cited by the petitioner refer to veterans of the Civil War, who are expressly preferred by constitutional provision.

Motion for alternative writ of mandamus denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

GREENBAUM, J.

The rights of an honorably discharged veteran of the volunteer navy of the United States during the Spanish War are analogous to those of a volunteer fireman and arise under section 22 of the Civil Service Law and not section 21, which applies to honor[1036]*1036ably discharged soldiers, sailors, or marines in the late Civil War. I am therefore constrained to hold, following Cottam v. City of N. Y., 74 Misc. Rep. 67, 131 N. Y. Supp. 617, that the petitioner may not properly claim a preference over other draftsmen in the borough president’s department by requiring their discharge because of lack of funds, so that he may thereby be retained in his position. The procedure that may be pursued by petitioner under section 22 of the Civil Service Law is outlined in Matter of Breckenridge, 160 N. Y. 103, 54 N. E. 670. The cases cited by the petitioner refer to veterans of the Civil War, who are expressly preferred by constitutional provision.

Motion for alternative writ of mandamus denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 N.Y.S. 1035, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurlbut-v-cromwell-nysupct-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack