People ex rel. Corscadden v. Howe

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Corscadden v. Howe

84 N.Y.S. 604

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 17, 1903·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

SMITH, J.

We see no ground for this appeal. The relator has acted and is acting as superintendent of the penitentiary under a salary prescribed by statute, to which he is clearly entitled. He has not been removed by the commission, and, if the right of the commission to remove him be assumed for the argument, until he is removed he is entitled to full for services rendered.

The order should therefore be affirmed, without costs. All concur.

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

SMITH, J.

We see no ground for this appeal. The relator has acted and is acting as superintendent of the penitentiary under a salary prescribed by statute, to which he is clearly entitled. He has not been removed by the commission, and, if the right of the commission to remove him be assumed for the argument, until he is removed he is entitled to full for services rendered.

The order should therefore be affirmed, without costs. All concur.

People ex rel. Corscadden v. Howe, 84 N.Y.S. 604 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

84 N.Y.S. 604 (People ex rel. Corscadden v. Howe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related