Mullane v. McKenzie
Opinion
It appears without contradiction that Carroll was separated from, the competitive civil service for a period of almost four years. Under these circumstances his date of original appointment in the service must be deemed to be November 8, 1929. (Matter of O’Dea v. Delaney, 241 App. Div. 844; Matter of Weiher v. Greene, 239 id. 652.) (See, also, Koso v. Greene, 260 N. Y. 491.) The petitioner Mullane was accordingly entitled to be retained in the service in preference to Carroll. This motion for a peremptory order of mandamus is granted. Settle order.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
153 Misc. 255 (Mullane v. McKenzie) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.