People ex rel. Burns v. Lyons

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Burns v. Lyons

266 A.D. 1053, 44 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5907

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 5, 1943

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 266 A.D. 1053 (People ex rel. Burns v. Lyons) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People ex rel. Burns v. Lyons, 266 A.D. 1053, 44 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: The State Civil Service Commission, at the request of appellant, certified the names of three guards for promotion to the position of sergeant in their graded order, namely: (1) Wilkins, (2) Burns (petitioner-respondent) and (3) Johnson. All had passed competitive civil service examinations for the position and had [1054]*1054claimed and received a preference as disabled war veterans (Civil Service Law, § 21; Rules for Classified Civil Service, rule XI, subd. 1). We think that subdivision 2 of rule VIII, applied, and gave to appellant the right to select any one of these three disabled veterans and that the appointment of Johnson was valid. All concur. (The order directs defendant to appoint petitioner to the rank of sergeant in the Department of Correction.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.

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

Memorandum: The State Civil Service Commission, at the request of appellant, certified the names of three guards for promotion to the position of sergeant in their graded order, namely: (1) Wilkins, (2) Burns (petitioner-respondent) and (3) Johnson. All had passed competitive civil service examinations for the position and had [1054]*1054claimed and received a preference as disabled war veterans (Civil Service Law, § 21; Rules for Classified Civil Service, rule XI, subd. 1). We think that subdivision 2 of rule VIII, applied, and gave to appellant the right to select any one of these three disabled veterans and that the appointment of Johnson was valid. All concur. (The order directs defendant to appoint petitioner to the rank of sergeant in the Department of Correction.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D. 1053, 44 N.Y.S.2d 820, 1943 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5907, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-burns-v-lyons-nyappdiv-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack