People ex rel. Cahill v. Barker

5 A.D. 227, 39 N.Y.S. 140
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 15, 1896
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 5 A.D. 227 (People ex rel. Cahill v. Barker) 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. Cahill v. Barker, 5 A.D. 227, 39 N.Y.S. 140 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1896).

Opinion

Williams, J. :

Article 10, section 3, of the Constitution, as it existed prior to 1894, and as it still exists, provides: When the duration of any [229]*229office is not provided by this Constitution it may be declared by law, and if not so declared, such office shall be held during the pleasure of the authority making the appointment.”

The duration of this office was not provided for by the Constitution, nor was it declared by the Consolidation Act or any other act of the Legislature.

The relator was not within any of the provisions of law limiting the power of removal, as in cases of the police force, heads of bureaus, clerks, veterans, etc.

We see no escape, therefore, from the conclusion that the respondents had the power to remove the relator from his office as assessor at their pleasure.

The writ should be dismissed.

Van Brunt, P. J., Rumsey, O’Brien and Ingraham, JJ., concurred.

Writ dismissed.

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

Related

Bornstein v. Freeman
1 A.D.2d 777 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1956)
Bank of Malden v. Wayne Heading Co.
200 S.W. 693 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1918)
Fairbanks Steam Shovel Co. v. Wills
212 F. 688 (Seventh Circuit, 1914)
People ex rel. Bowers v. Dalton
23 Misc. 294 (New York Supreme Court, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
5 A.D. 227, 39 N.Y.S. 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-ex-rel-cahill-v-barker-nyappdiv-1896.